Oldsock:
chewy retired from this thread long ago. It has been taken over by someone else who is going to court.
|
|
Thanks, jbif - the caffeine hasn't started working yet :-)
|
|
up here in glasgow we have a dual carrageway called great western road (A82) and for about 5 miles it is 6 lanes wide ( 3 lanes each way ) and guess the speed limit ....yep 30 ! I travel this road every day and most cars average 35-40 , very very easy to be caught out as the houses are set so far back from the road that it looks more like a 40 or 50 limit
|
Thanks for your replies guys.
I will be suitably contrite on the day.
As for "bearing down on the kiosks and a line of parked traffic" I will give this a wide berth! At the point of capture I was still more than 1/2 mile from the kiosks, so not exactly "bearing down". However as I drove over the tarmac-printed signs I'm sure I was doing 50 because that's when I noticed the camera van.
I was absolutely guilty of using the speed limit signs as a cue to think about slowing down, not as an instruction to be doing that speed as I passed them. It's a bad habit to develop but in 25+ years driving, I've never been challenged about it. What's more, I've noticed that I have been doing it in other places too, so am overdue a correction. Should I mention this in court or am I just digging myself a deeper hole?
|
>What's more, I've noticed that I have been doing it in other places too, so am overdue a >correction. Should I mention this in court or am I just digging myself a deeper hole?
Hells Bells no. Dont mention this, thats like saying you are are confirmed speeder....
What you had a was a "momentary lapse of concentration in an otherwise unblemished record of driving, that has never happened before and willl never happen again"
|
AE is right. A cringing, self-flagellating, vibrantly insincere approach works best with most courts. They see it as a tribute to their awful dignity and authority.
Observation of < snip > in action tells us, too, that any address to the court should be liberally sprinkled with references to the dreadful majesty of the bench: 'M'lud', 'your lordship', 'sir', 'yer honour', 'your worships', etc. This may not put them in a good mood, but its absence may well put them in a bad one.
Edited by rtj70 on 28/07/2009 at 16:10
|
< snip >
oh all right, ambulance-chasing, morally ambiguous individuals with law degrees then.
|
|
|
Observation of < snip > in action tells us too that any address to the court should be liberally sprinkled with references to the dreadful majesty of the bench: 'M'lud' 'your lordship' 'sir' 'yer honour' 'your worships' etc. This may not put them in a good mood but its absence may well put them in a bad one.
Stick to 'Your Worship(s) and Sir/Madam in a Magistrates' Court. Using the rest will make them think you're Arfur Daley on a day out or an ex-con.
|
|
|
|
|
1200 yards is enough to stop from 380 mph let alone 80. It is ludicrous to suggest that it is dangerous to exceed 50 in the very long stretch of 50 limit.
Like many others, these drivers have been caught out by rigid enforcement by camera of theoretical maximum road speeds. People used to see the appearance of a lower speed limit sign as a cue to start slowing down for the hazard, village or whatever. That always worked perfectly well. Now though, with cameras and jobsworths, a lower speed limit sign means that if you drive normally some tinpot 'authority' will rob you of a sum of money and put excremental thumb marks on your licence.
Best to brake sharply as you pass the sign and hope some twit will run into you so you can sue them and the authority for whiplash. They want us to drive badly? Let's do it.
|
|
And what if something goes wrong like a tyre bursts or the brake fails?That is why the speed limits are in place. If a brake line fails at 50mph and least you still have two servo assisted brakes at 80mph I would imagine it would be a lot harder to stop on two brakes.
|
Failing brake line? Brake failure? you have been watching too much Canon, CHIPS, rockford files, or someother trashy 70s american shows.
Burst tyre at 80mph? you wont make the toll booths, you will be off into the river severn somewhere, boy its muddy down there,
|
|
|
|
great western road (A82) >>
I remember when the police would set up speed traps about a mile apart on that road.
The second one was always the busiest!
|
gcck:
I used the phrase 'bearing down' to illustrate how a particular action can be made to look in a court.
You've described the circumstances well enough and I don't think many of us would take great issue with how you drove.
But you really must not go down that route in court.
Any, and I mean any, criticism of the mechanism that brought you to court will be viewed very dimly by the magistrates.
Perhaps you could say something like: "I aplogise for missing the 50 mph limit signs.
"This has worried me so much I've been back to the scene and they are perfectly clear.
"It was a poor, but only momentary, lapse in concentration on my part.
"All I can add is that I slowed to 50mph, or under, well in advance of the toll plaza itself, so I don't believe I presented a hazard to anyone there.
"It was a stupid mistake and I'm determined it will not be repeated."
Then you can go on about your long and unblemished driving record, the fact you've never been in any trouble with the police, how the court appearance has brought you up short, how you believe speeding to be morally reprehensible etc, etc.
|
whats your daily rate ifi? I think the poster may be employing you to represent him,
|
|
|
Spot on ifithelps.
A colleague's son was caught doing 99mph (many years too late IMHO when I hear tales from his dad of how quickly they seem to get from one end of the Country to the other).
Immediately afterwards it was everybody's fault but his own, including the police for having the audacity to sit in a police car with a speed gun.
His first reaction was to plead not guilty and have his day fighting the law.
Eventually he calmed down, took a reality check, read a few forums with advice from those in the know, spoke to another colleague who is a magistrate, pleaded guilty, but had his five minutes to say how much of a naughty boy he'd been.
Walked out with 6 points and a £250 fine.
|
I know someone, quite well actually, who some years ago was pulled by a traffic car on the M5 at 105 mph.
He didn't attempt to defend his actions to the police officers and limited his comments to polite cooperation.
The case went to court. He did not attempt to defend his actions there either. Nor indeed did he make any representations about job loss or imply that his attention had wandered.
He did, despite normally only being seen in jeans, buy a sober suit, a white shirt and a dark tie. A fresh haircut and shiny shoes to complete the fine upstanding look.
He pleaded guity to the charge and when asked if he would care to make any further comments before the penalty was issued he said the following....( I can remember this bit verbatim, like I said I know this guy quite well. )........
"I make no excuse for my actions. I knew exactly what I was doing. I was in a hurry and chose to speed in an attempt to keep an appointment which was important to me. I was concentrating hard on my driving but clearly not hard enough to spot the patrol car which stopped me. I should have known better. I have spent my life driving long distances as part of my work. I have on many occasions seen the aftermath of others thinking they were above the law and the carnage that can cause. I have had three months since the date of the incident to think about that and I can not deny my responsibility. I deserve to be penalised for it. At what level that penalty is set is of course your decision. I have to live with the consequences of that. In short though I would like to make one final promise. In any event, no matter what penalty I am given, I can unequivocally assure you that I have learned my lesson and you will not be asking to see me again. Thank you for your time"
3 points and £60
Sorted !!
;-)
|
Humph,
I was a bit worried about the first bit - 'I chose to speed' - but you, I mean the man, pulled it around well and finished on a high note.
Well done.
Edited by ifithelps on 28/07/2009 at 17:16
|
Well done.
I agree. Truthful*, dignified and no cringing. Not all lawyers can do as well.
*With the possible exception of the promise to be good in future.
|
I know Lud but this bloke has a bit of a rep as a smarmy gti.....
;-)
|
I have a black-and-white image of Tony Hancock in my head right now.
"The quality of mercy is not strained........." :-)
|
|
Or should that be stained? :)
|
|
What a country we live in, what a wretched state of affairs, I mean, going to court for 78 mph on a clear motorway, if it were not so potentially serious for the OP, it would be laughable. I'm really pleased my council tax is being put to such wonderfully efficient use as to catch these lethal law-breaking types, so I can sleep easier in my bed at night. Good luck OP.
|
What a country we live in, what a wretched state of affairs, I mean, going to court for 78 mph on a clear motorway
But it wasn't a clear stretch of motorway with a 70mph limit. It was approaching toll booths in a 50mph limit.
|
>> What a country we live in what a wretched state of affairs I mean going to court for 78 >> mph on a clear motorway But it wasn't a clear stretch of motorway with a 70mph limit. It was approaching toll booths in a 50mph limit.
It was more than 1/2 a mile BEFORE the toll booths - not exactly dangerous, unless the road conditions were poor or there was heavy traffic in the area. Neither of these things were mentioned.
I know the road quite well and always slow down as I enter the 50 zone but I would assume I'm not down to 50 as I enter it every time. Seems a harsh thing but there we go the camera never lies.
|
"The quality of mercy is not strained........."
Quite a good defence if stopped in a....... ahem.......Porsche....I s'pose.
Sorry Will !
|
Cycling home last night (along London Road in Glasgow for those who know it) I saw a car being flashed by the speed camera on the other side.
Now this is a dual carriageway, limit is 40 and then it goes down to 30 about 2-300 yards before the speed camera.
The road is very clear and "open". The 30 signs are very predominant. Once you pass them there is then speed camera signs , also with a 30 on them. Then there is a fluorescent pole mounted Gatso with absolutely no street furniture to block it. Then there are the tell tale white lines across the road.
And this car, driven by a middle aged guy gets flashed. It seems to take him by shock, looking in his mirrors to see what the light was.
Now for every one of us on here who criticises speed cameras and their uses etc, there will be someone like this numpty who racks up the points, the fines and the statistics that justifies their use. And I have to be brutally honest, its hard to argue against! Because if he didn't see the camera with all those tell tale signs, would he see me on my bike with my hi-vis, a red traffic light etc etc?
Now I know there is a slight chance car was stolen or whatever and driver didn't care, but his reaction didn't appear that way.
Yes people may argue was what he was doing really illegal or doing anyone any harm on a clear road and cameras don't catch phone users etc but to get caught by that camera really smacks of total incompetence.
|
Bobby G,
Agreed.
Been along this road only a few times, but I've seen people flashed in similar circumstances.
Like you, I wondered at the general observation skills of the drivers who were caught.
|
This has been my consistent point.
I wont moan about anyone speeding, but i will roundly criticise those who get CAUGHT doing it, specially by fixed cameras.
Its 100% proof that your observation skills are poor and you are therefore not a good enough driver to handle speed. How people get banned under totting up for speeding is beyond me. Further proof that their sense and observation skills are so appaling they should be banned for life as a danger to the rest of us.
|
I agree with most of the views above, especially about not seeing a fixed camera meaning poor observation, but I now speak as one recently caught out. My first points on a licence held for 40 years on both cars and motorbikes, routinely covering 25,000 miles per year. The camera van was hidden behind a lorry in a lay-by covering a three lane section of road just before a major hill. I cannot use excuses as I simply passed a lorry in order to not be behind him as he crawled up the hill to come. Many cars did the same and all must have exceeded the 60mph limit as they used the extra lane on their side to do the same.
No one was being reckless or foolhardy but all were exceeding the limit.
Now of course having had time to clearly think about it I make sure that I do not put myself in a similiar situation. I now slow up before a limit sign so that I am not exceeding that limit as I pass the sign.
There is a major problem with this course of action. No one else does it.
The Fench have the solution by using graded limits to reduce speed, but then of course a large number of £60 might be lost as revenue.
Sticking to speed limits is easy as long as you can disregard all those who don't!
|
Point being paulvm, now you have three points. Ho Hum, you accept you got caught out. Fair enough, its one of those things.
So how will you behave now? You will take care to be inside the speed limit where you cant see there is no camera, and where you can see there is very very little chance of you getting caught (like a nice clear road with perfect visibility) you will wind the throttle out a little.
All perfectly sensible behaviour, perfectly legitimate driving.
You wont be on here with 9 points whining about how its all so unfair,
|
Altea Ego - I could not have put it better myself!
Happy and safe driving in the prevailing conditions to you all.
|
So how will you behave now? You will take care to be inside the speed limit where you cant see there is no camera and where you can see there is very very little chance of you getting caught (like a nice clear road with perfect visibility) you will wind the throttle out a little.
... and shows what a joke the term 'safety camera' is though.
So nowadays many are urgently scanning the layby's, (giving extra thought to the white van parked in there); bridges; hedges etc and/or your portable satnav...instead of concentrating properly on the road and other road users
|
So nowadays many are urgently scanning the layby's (giving extra thought to the white van parked in there); bridges; hedges etc and/or your portable satnav...instead of concentrating properly on the road and other road users
Laybys, bridges, hedges, etc are all part of the road and environment, and all should be in your awareness. As is the traffic behind you
I am sure you are not advocating staring blindly down the tunnel that is the road ahead,
|
I am sure you are not advocating staring blindly down the tunnel that is the road ahead
no, not at all.......and neither do I think it wise to overly concentrate on areas that you wouldn't normally....to the detriment of other aspects of your driving
|
...show what a nation of suckers Britain is....
The suckers to which HJ refers are presumably those people who choose to stick to the speed limit.
Given that law-breaking in all its forms is such a scourge on our society, it's a shame there aren't more of these suckers about.
|
|
I don't think HJ was advocating law-breaking in any form ifithelps. He was agreeing with Westpig - a policeman - that money-grubbing speed cameras are a distraction from the quite complex activity of driving, usually if not quite always don't have a positive effect on safety and may have a negative one.
|
...speed cameras are a distraction....
If you choose to obey the speed limit, speed cameras are not a distraction, they are an irrelevance.
The acceptance of limited law-breaking, in ill-defined circumstances, by someone-or-other, leads to confusion and ultimately undermines the rule of law.
Look at motorways as an example.
The speed limit is 70mph, yet if you overtake in the third lane at 70mph, you will often incur the ire of the driver behind you.
Then someboody spots a car with a light on top and everyone slams on the anchors.
Bunching, tailgating and consequently accidents, would reduce if everyone observed the speed limit.
|
if you overtake in the third lane at 70mph, you will often incur the ire of the driver behind you.
It's true that the overtaking lane is no place for someone doing a rigid 65, overtaking a frisky 60-foot long HGV doing 64 in the middle lane past a long queue of its slower brethren, if that is what you mean ifithelps (and I can't help thinking it may be).
The nub of this difference seems to be that some individuals see the act of exceeding a speed limit, even briefly while overtaking to minimise danger and annoyance to other drivers, as a crime, when really it is a technical infraction of what amounts to a regulatory guideline (rather than a law like the law against assault for example). Willingness to edge over a speed limit may even amount to 'good driving' in itself. It certainly isn't linked to tolerant attitudes where real crimes are concerned, although it can of course accompany them.
|
>>>>>>>overtaking a frisky 60-foot long HGV doing 64 in the middle lane past a long queue of its slower brethren<<<<<<<
Now, come on Lud, you didn't really think I'd let you get away with that, did you?
We all know HGV's are limited to a maximum of 56MPH on motorways even though the legal speed limit is 60MPH for HGV's.
Now if it happened to be a long downhill stretch, and the lorry was loaded then maybe it can reach ?MPH!
Can I just add into this argument/discussion, that HGV drivers frequently clock up points and it is usually in the early hours at dark o'clock when a speed camera is placed at what is deemed to be an accident black spot in the rush hour.
Because of this we DO spend too much time looking for cameras, at the satnav to warn us, and generally trying to protect our licence and ultimately our job.
Yes it can be argued that if we kept at 40 mph on those long, flat empty stretches of road at 2.30am, we wouldn't have to worry.
The lesser of two evels though, is do you go to sleep from monotony and boredom, or do you run the risk?
Of course there are many lorry drivers who decide to take as long as possible doing the job because 'they are paid hourly'...........................not me I hasten to add.
As for the OP, humility and grovelling are what's needed now.
I don't envy anyone sitting in a queue anywhere looking in their mirrors to see someone going 20odd miles faster than they should be.
Pat
|
Its the speeders fault that cameras exist - if people didnt speed, they would be redundant, its just a tax and if its costs more than it brings in, eventually it disappears, so really, speeders support speed cameras. Simple business, cause and effect.
|
stu and ifithelps,
If speed limits were set sensibly there'd be much more chance of the average Joe sticking to them
If you drive over London Bridge, the limit is now 20mph...inc at 5am in the morning. If you drive past some schools, there's 20mph limits...again 24 hours a day..and at the moment all the kids are on their summer holidays.
Many of our towns and villages have vast tracts of 30mph or 40mph limits at their outer limits (whether they need them or not), when they used to be NSL.
For so many people in this country to speed, it tells me the system has fallen into disrepute...which is a shame, because there are plenty of places where a limit is really necessary.
I would like to drive down a road and be able to believe the sign i.e. think it's there for a valid reason...not just because someone in bureaucracy wants to 'slow everyone down'..or someone vociferous locally has bent the ear of the local councillor who wants to be voted back in
this govt is now advocating a more general 50mph NSL...deep joy...where do I join 'Mimsers Unite'
|
Westpig,
I agree with much of what you say, but the way to change things is via the democratic process.
It is not for the driver to ignore a limit because, in his wisdom, he has decided it does not apply to him or is too low.
It is certainly not for the driver to bully, cajole and otherwise intimidate another driver who chooses to abide by the limits.
|
the way to change things is via the democratic process.
Agreed ifithelps. But it is not universally acknowledged, although widely recognised, that the democratic process includes dissent, confrontation and so forth... if people had never stretched the envelope a bit, it (the democratic process, the product of centuries of often struggle) wouldn't exist.
It's nothing to do with the driver's wisdom or lack of it. Lots of speed limits are too low, no ifs or buts. If you haven't noticed that one can only despair of you.
No one is trying to bully, cajole or intimidate you or any other soi-disant driver who 'chooses to abide by the limits'. Even when the idiot gets annoyingly and pointlessly in the way of the adult traffic going about its business, or trying to. But it really is much better for everyone when people don't do that.
Edited by Webmaster on 30/07/2009 at 01:49
|
I don't agree with bullying in any way shape or form, particularly when people are driving...
but I can't help thinking that some people can help themselves more i.e. if some of the 'bullied' didn't go out of their way to restrain or hold up other drivers, or even made some effort to let faster drivers past (which is what they're supposed to do) then half the time it would never happen
although i'd agree two wrongs don't make a right...
|
|
I agree, WP. It boils down to being aware of the presence of other road-users and recognising that their priorities might not be your own - and behaving accordingly.
|
>>If speed limits were set sensibly there'd be much more chance of the average Joe sticking to them<<
The average Joe doesnt care what the limit is, they break it because they can, there is little incentive not to.
If you make motorways 80, the majority will cruise at 90, its in the nature of people in a permissive society to push the boundries of what they are told they are allowed to do.
The reason we have laws and enforcement of them, is because left to their own devices, people will do whatever they feel like - for instance, today a guy pulled out infront of me from a side road, then simply stopped my lane of traffic while he waited for a gap on the other side to appear holding up my lane with atleast 10 cars waiting - now, I would dearly love to take a solid object to his vehicle and demonstrate just how annoying he had been - the law is what stopped me, becuase it says ( no matter how true it is ) that it and it alone will deal with people who do wrong. As such, I drive on and let it go because apparently the law will deal with him.
It doesnt of course, but I have the faith that if he does something really wrong, the law will make his disappear into a cell somewhere at the very least. That is the publics reward for not taking the law into their own hands.
By breaking the limit, you are saying that the spirit of the law is break it as and when you disagree with it, but also expect it to protect you when the boot is on the other foot.
Its a two-way street and breaking the limit is against the spirit of that.
|
The average Joe doesnt care what the limit is, they break it because they can, there is little incentive not to.
Not sure I quite agree, I am a little more optimistic than that and believe people will in fact largely obey a sensible, valid speed limit, as WP says, put there for a genuine reason. It's the ill-thought out, needless over-kill ones that people will not abide. Large parts of rural Oxfordshire and 30mph limits spring to mind.
|
This thread is getting a bit existential!
Trouble is, we're lined up for our punishment one by one. If we all marched on parliament as one, there'd be more notice taken of the iniquity of it all.
|
The average Joe doesnt care what the limit is they break it because they can there is little incentive not to.
I disagree with that. I think most people break the limit, because they think it is too low and they can achieve what they want to achieve at a higher speed. There will always be some that will drive like lunatics at whatever the speed limit, i'm not talking about them, i'm talking about Joe Average, who with most things in life is totally law abiding, but 'grabs a bit' when it comes to the open road.
If you make motorways 80 the majority will cruise at 90 its in the nature of people in a permissive society to push the boundries of what they are told they are allowed to do.
Again i'm not convinced. Many more people nowadays are more conscious of the cost or the environmental issues, so would not necessarily drive fast just because they can. I have a limit, i stick to it and don't really wish to drive faster than that. If a national speed limit achieved my limit i wouldn't drive faster, i'm comfortable at that level. It has a balance of fuel economy, time of arrival for the journey, interest and lack of boredom for the journey, that suits me, etc..so that would be me. What speed would you drive down a derestricted Autobahn...some unnaturally (to you) high speed or what you usually do?
By breaking the limit you are saying that the spirit of the law is break it as and when you disagree with it but also expect it to protect you when the boot is on the other foot. Its a two-way street and breaking the limit is against the spirit of that.
Depends which law you are talking about. Some laws are extremely minor, some have been ridiculous or contemptible. Some deserved to be ignored...yet some are essential and to be commended. IMO it is overly simplistic to state the, 'the law is the law'... what happens if some cretin designed it and it slipped through ... is no one willing to challenge it? ....are we all sheep?
|
The attitude of some contributors to this thread show they SHOULD NOT be driving.
Tuesday morning 0700 I was driving into Lichfield on the A51, 40mph limit past Beacon Park tailgated by someone who objected to my sat nav indicated 40mph.
As the road enters the built up area you pass in 100 yards a 30mph sign (2 actually), a pellican crossing and a junction before you come to a roundabout give way line (Bowling Green pub in the middle) and being 300 yards from the driving test centre lots of learner drivers (sometimes even at 0700). I slowed for the 30mph and so did the tailgater, just to give in to his frustration and overtake in the approach to the crossing and dash off into the distance.
Now his arguments could be . . .
- it was 0700 and there wouldn't really be anyone on the road. I was and there are always people walking to work and joggers.
- it is safe to travel faster than the limit there. Not really - road and roundabout was notorious for accidents when I lived in Lichfiled (my daugher hates driving round it because of the accidents).
- I am a better than normal driver so it is safe for me to go faster - is he really?
What his problem really is . . .
- He can't be bothered to get up five minutes earlier;
- He is too insulated from the outside world in his steel box on wheels;
- He does not care about anyone else,
And why did he do it - there is no camera there!
Now numerous people will get upset at my comments - all I will say is "if the cap fits . . . ."
To paraphrase what the European Court said - Driving is a privilege and when we get into a car we accept that there is a set of rules we must comply with - these include speed limits.
Edited by ijws15 on 30/07/2009 at 09:40
|
|
Well according to our resident police folk, we should simply break the limit if we see it as unreasonable. Of course, they will say that right up to the point that they happen to disagree with your idea of reasonable.
|
Well according to our resident police folk we should simply break the limit if we see it as unreasonable. Of course they will say that right up to the point that they happen to disagree with your idea of reasonable.
Stu,
My views are...my views. They are one persons take on ths issues. They are not official spokespersons views and neither are they a collective of other posters views on here. Who knows I might be wrong, although I obviously don't think so, otherwise I wouldn't post it.
|
- He can't be bothered to get up five minutes earlier; - He is too insulated from the outside world in his steel box on wheels; - He does not care about anyone else
Spot on, and especially the last one!
|
Driving is a privilege and when we get into a car we accept that there is a set of >>rules we must comply with - these include speed limits.
It's a matter of using some common sense...unfortunately some people either don't have any or are unwilling to think to use it. Driving into a built up area is where most of the dangers are, so there didn't ought to be any real arguement about driving at a sensible speed and not doing daft overtakes.
Likewise on an open road IN THE RIGHT CONDITIONS you could drive a bit faster than what seems the norm nowadays.
I'm advocating a sensible middle option not argueing from one of the poles (albeit it suits some people's arguements to put me at a pole)
|
..It's a matter of using some common sense...
Westpig,
I agree.
If everyone could be relied upon to use common sense, we wouldn't need speed limits at all.
But they can't, so limits it is, then.
|
>>But they can't, so limits it is, then.
One of the problems is that because we have limits everywhere, there is nowhere for people to learn this judgement.
As also many speed limits are far too low - an entire length of many miles of road being subject to a limit just because there is a short section where a lower limit really is needed.
I would like to see many limits raised or removed altogether, and those which are left more rigidly enforced.
If the current creeping malaise of ever reducing limits continues, the concept of speed limits themselves and the respect motorists pay to them will be undermined.
It's close to a political view, but, I do tend to trust the majority of people to make sensible choices, and I reject nannying and state derived hectoring where possible.
|
I dont buy into this concept that majority of people are sensible, its the minority that are.
The end of the close I live in as an example - to the right is a curve in the road, which means that approach that bend on the main road at anything much above 30 and it means that anyone pulling out the close has only a few seconds before the approaching car is 'on' them.
This happened to me today - I pulled out, road was clear, I infact kept looking to my right as I turned left, still nothing, but by the time my car was straightened out and I was going for second gear, a Megane had appeared feet from my rear bumper doing a heavy braking session. The worst bit was the young child in the front seat - its bad enough when your on your own, but to drive like that with kids in the car, those people wanna be shot.
Even before that car came along, it was car after car flying past - infact a survey was carried out due to this very problem and it was found that more than 70% of cars were exceeding 35 and 54% exceeding 40.
Problem is, the road before the bend is straight, albeit a 30 zone between the two villages not to mention a school which is signposted but not visable until your next to it, so people assume faster is more reasonable when infact it is not, but people clearly are too stupid to make the proper judgement.
30 does give you just enough time and it is spot on for the road and conditions but it is ignored by the supposedly sensible majority who me thinks, are given too much credit for their judgement.
|
Sounds like one of the good places for a highly visible camera, stunorthants. There's one not far from where I live in the middle (more or less) of London, near a pub where I like to sit outside and observe the traffic out of the corner of my eye. The traffic is more boring to watch now, but you don't have the feeling there's a slight chance of you and your pint being mown down by a BMW or Range Rover deflected onto the pavement by a mimser when undertaking a line of them at 80 down the bus lane...
There are places on every route where extra concentration is called for, or extra-heavy acceleration is usually a good idea. It mus be a bit wearing to have one at the only exit from your street though.
|
It is in essence why Im so hot on speed limits - on most roads, I simply dont know them well enough to know every single locally known danger, so I stick to the limit or below depending on conditions.
I have personal experience of why speed limits matter and if you have enough near misses, you realise life is too short to end it sooner than intended, only realising why the limit exists just before you get crushed in your tin can of a car. Maybe having a son has made me ultra cautious about my need to live, who knows, but those few minutes you save by going faster, they amount to almost no real gain against the risks.
I would change motorway speeds, they are silly, but someones gotta change them before ill risk a ticket - not all police are as progressive as those here.
|
I simply dont know them well enough to know every single locally known danger
I did Manchester to Sheffield via the Snake Pass for months back in 2000/2001. Despite soft suspension, I quickly learned the bumps/dips/etc in the road and could go fairly fast (not speeding) in my Passat 1.8T. Then one day some idiot was ovetaking about 5 cars on a blind bend and heading towards me!
... not a problem as I slowed/stopped easily. But did make me wonder about other drivers mentality. If I was going near the speed limit we'd have collided.
Note I considered very few points on the Snake Pass as overtaking opportunities! I valued my life.
Edited by rtj70 on 30/07/2009 at 18:07
|
When I started driving there was no NSL and precious little motorway. There was less traffic of course, and small cars were pushed to get up to 70, but suspension was often quite primitive and levels of tyre and brake performance were grossly inferior in most cases to the ones we are used to now.
Like others, I was fairly reckless in youth but not suicidal or half-witted. I was lucky too I suppose, and so was everyone else. But having witnessed and done driving of all types, I certainly know the difference between dangerous driving and driving which is merely brisk. In my own case, worrying about speed limits, except to avoid being fined, hardly comes into it at all. And I do find the tendency of local authorities to impose low blanket limits on fast bits of safe road extremely depressing and annoying. But it takes all sorts to make a world.
|
I dont buy into this concept that majority of people are sensible its the minority that are.
that may be so, it may not be...but whatever the true stats are, they'll never improve unless they are given the opportunity to THINK FOR THEMSELVES. Vast tracts of limits that are often too low = vast numbers of people who can't think for themselves, they drive like automatons.
There are armies of people out there who can't overtake..ever. You see them stuck behind stopped buses. The only way they'll ever improve is to give it a go, up their game a bit.
|
>>Vast tracts of limits that are often too low = vast numbers of people who can't think for themselves, they drive like automatons<<
Or of course, you simply get alot of people who can think for themselves - they think, I dont want a speeding ticket regardless of how fast the road should be. Doesnt mean they switch off, it just means they arent straining to spot the camera van round the next corner and are instead concentrating on the cars and road infront of them. What a compelling choice that is.
|
Plenty of drivers simply don't want to drive at the limit or over.
They have just as much right to do 40/50mph in a 60mph zone as an another driver has to do 60/70mph.
In fact, the slower driver is more within his rights because he is not breaking the law.
It's the faster driver trying to force others to do something they don't want to do that I cannot stand.
Drive your own car - like a madman if you wish - but don't try to drive mine.
|
They have just as much right to do 40/50mph in a 60mph zone as an another driver has to do 60/70mph.
In fact, the slower driver is more within his rights because he is not breaking the law.
Well of course they do but unless you have a good reason for not going faster its good manners to drive so as not to obstruct others who would like to drive a little quicker.
|
Doesnt mean they switch off it just means they arent straining to spot the camera van round the next corner and are instead concentrating on the cars and road infront of them. What a compelling choice that is.
If I thought for one minute that was true, i'd concede....the trouble is it is not.
How many times have you travelled up a m/way and noticed the 'middle laner' bimbling along in his own little world..cheerfully oblivious to almost everything, but convinced he's safe because he obeys the limit; in fact drives a bit below it..yet, doesn't look ahead; never notices things building up i.e. the hazard becoming more and more of a problem; is caught out by people 'suddenly' coming past or catching him up, despite the fact they've been doing that for the past mile....how many times is that person yapping his head off or listening to the music or whatever...probably bored out of his head..doing everything but properly concentrating on the task.
I see them every single day, whether it's built up areas, m/ways or A roads.
Bottom line is this. I'm not a good passenger, not at all. If I had to undertake a long m/way journey with someone else driving and had a choice of the 65mph middle laner or someone who did 80/85 and was a keen driver...i'd take the latter every time...because they'd have to be more aware of their surroundings, by definition.
|
|
Agree completely. However, the Government gives the message (through advertising and speed cameras) that you are safe if you drive at or below the speed limit.
|
|
And being a bleating wimp, you believe them.
|
... its good manners to drive so as not to obstruct others...
It's also good manners to drive so as not to startle or alarm other road users.
|
good manners to drive so as not to startle or alarm other road users.
However polite you are, you can't help startling or alarming the Double Take Brothers - one of the main mimser stereotypes.
|
>>How many times have you travelled up a m/way and noticed the 'middle laner' bimbling along in his own little world..cheerfully oblivious to almost everything<<
You dont actually know they are oblivious, thats just your assumption that you state as fact to bulk up your arguement. Some people dont have very good observation skills granted, but speed or lack thereof wont suddenly improve them.
I drove Northampton to Norwich in convoy with my misses in her car at 50-55mph when she forst started driving as she was rather scared of fast roads ( shes fine now ). I normally drive at an indicated 75 which is about 68 real speed, but my skills didnt decrease, I was simply observing different things, such as people pulling into my lane and lorries overtaking for e.g.
This idea that driving slowly makes you a worse driver is ridiculous - your either abad driver or your not - ive seen many young drivers driving swiftly, but they clearly dont always have a clue about safe driving. Speed doesnt kill either way, its just lack of skill in a more general sense.
|
This idea that driving slowly makes you a worse driver is ridiculous -
Stu, I have neither suggested, hinted or stated that driving slowly makes you a worse driver. I do think that you can get bored more easily on long journeys and no doubt if you drove everywhere at a noticeably decreased rate, you wouldn't get or maintain the breadth of skills a faster driver could...but I have no doubt there are some excellent slower drivers.
I did state however that you can often see the slower drivers that do not have skills or choose not to use them.
>>Speed doesnt kill either way its just lack of skill in a more general sense.
Agreed....and the way to hone any skill....is to practice it, in varied forms.
|
I once drove at 140 mph - it does focus the mind for sure, but I wouldnt wholly recommend it is practiced :-)
As for getting bored, there are big signs at the side of the road saying take a break. If someone has the correct skills, they would know when it is sensible to do so.
I cant say driving at 50 is boring as it does give you more time to watch whats going on around you, which is somewhat more dangerous at 80.
|
On and on and on...
Look, if the press-on types promise not to tailgate or alarm people, will the respectable, patient, economical, law-abiding types promise not to get in the way or be annoying?
Ease the flow. Don't be uptight and obstruct it.
|
|
Eminently sensible Lud but unfortunately the respectable types insist on their right to be annoyed by anyone overtaking them and the press on types insist on their rights to be annoyed by anyone impeding their progress.
|
|
I think its more the press-on attitude that all slower cars should part like the Red Sea that annoys. Unless you have a police escort, it aint gonna happen, so id suggest you try marrying a prince.
|
Question for the MODS
Why did this not get moved into the speed camera thread?
I normally ignore that one!
|
Why did this not get moved into the speed camera thread?
We haven't moved any speed or speeding related subjects into those dedicated threads for quite a while now. Doesn't mean to say that we won't start again at some point in the future though.
DD.
|
>>How many times have you travelled up a m/way and noticed the 'middle laner' bimbling along in his own little world..cheerfully oblivious to almost everything<< You dont actually know they are oblivious thats just your assumption that you state as fact to bulk up your arguement.
Well..IMHO if they are not oblivious, then they are ignorant, self righteous, or plain stupid.
what I ask, is why do they feel the need to be in lane 2, when lane 1 is empty?
in my mind, the speed is not the issue, it is the lack of lane control.
When traffic is heavy, like say the M25 most of the time, then by using all the lanes, at similar speeds, if fine, in fact it IS the correct thing to do.
BUT on a relativity quiet motorway/dual carriage way, then lane 1 is the ONLY lane to use, EXCEPT when actually overtaking slower moving traffic.
I cannot see any sane argument for being in lanes 2, 3 or 4 UNLESS overtaking or as I said the traffic density is high..
Im sure someone will try and enlighten me though..........
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
