Safe Speed Forums

I've been juggling knives for 15 years without incident, doesn't make it safe.

But you not defined "high risk"

Und juggling knives (or balls) for 15 years without incident ist still irrelevant as it the COAST und the constant attention to it which matter whether or not you juggling knives, balls, trying to shoot an apple perched on son's head during archery practice after Church on Sunday or enjoying a drive minding OWN business but defending against actions of the other numpties about which matter

But Italy change speed limit on many motorway stretches to 90 mph... Austria has two 100 mph stretches now after the succcess of the first one. Somehow .. they found accidents did not happen when they do this on that road. It very straight stretch. Nice surface too But no matter... they also teach folk how to drive properly there anyway


Germany has derestrict sections. I have driven my lovely car at the speed he designed to do He enjoyed his little holiday as much as I did. But everyone there kept proper lane discipline und distance in this flow of pristinely moving vehicles.

But then - these are the values as taught -firmly from start. Here? Lack lustre teaching to a prescribed test - with practice only on the test routes which the Learner become too familiar with und it does not really prepare with the "seed for lasting learning" - along with a "blanket dogma that you und other folk will never die so long as you abide by a lolly". It not prevent accidents nor even better driving standards.

_________________
Nicht ganz im Lot!
Ich setze mich immer wieder in die Nesseln! Der Mad Doc ist mein Mann! Und ich benutzte seinen PC!

UND OUR SMILEYS? Smile ... und the the world smiles with you.
Smiley guy seen when you read
Fine me for Safe Speed
(& other good causes..)

Greatest love & Greatest Achievements Require Greatest Risk
But if you lose the driving plan - don't lose the COAST lesson.
Me?
Je ne regrette rien!

Really? Ever been to Germany?

_________________
The views expressed in this post are personal opinions and do not necessarily represent the views of Safe Speed.
You will be branded a threat to society by going over a speed limit where it is safe to do so, and suffer the consequences of your actions in a way criminals do not, more so than someone who is a real threat to our society.

90 miles per hour is only terrifying and unsafe in an micro car, tuk-tuk or a group 1 insurance car. Splash some cash and try a 1.3l , Also driving without correct visiongives the impression that the world is mad.

If any one is finding the roads too scarey first try visiting the opticians
failing that try a slightly better car.

_________________
Speed limit sign radio interview. TV Snap Unhappy
“It has never been the rule in this country – I hope it never will be - that suspected criminal offences must automatically be the subject of prosecution” He added that there should be a prosecution: “wherever it appears that the offence or the circumstances of its commission is or are of such a character that a prosecution in respect thereof is required in the public interest”
This approach has been endorsed by Attorney General ever since 1951. CPS Code

I once came off the back of my friends motorbike at 75mph, circa 1977, wearing jeans and a Denim jacket. When we came to a halt we got up and walked over to see the damage to his motor bike, (It's a biker thing).

I had much skin missing and bruises and aches the next day but apart from that I was okay; no hospitalisation.

By stark contrast, the worst accident I have ever had was again on two wheels, my push bike this time, doing ~10 mph! A car forced me up the curb in about 1988.

Although I didn't loose so much skin this time, (which I would have saved on the motorbike if I could have afforded good leathers), I badly hurt my foot, knee, hip, shoulder, elbow and face. I didn't get off the floor for minutes while people around me, who saw what happened, offered to help. I sat there with my head down feeling sick with the pain. The bruise which came up on my shoulder the next day was the size of a dinner plate. I couldn't walk properly for days or lift my arm above my head without pain for weeks.

Now you may think I am lying or exaggerating to make a case but I can promise you I am not! It took years to fully recover with weight training and physio. All this at about 10 mph.

Sure, if I actually hit something at 70 mph I wouldn't know much about it. But then if I had hit a lamppost or head-butted the ground at 10mph I probably wouldn't either.

It sounds to me like weepej and his like want everyone to live in a bubble.

_________________
The views expressed in this post are personal opinions and do not necessarily represent the views of Safe Speed.
You will be branded a threat to society by going over a speed limit where it is safe to do so, and suffer the consequences of your actions in a way criminals do not, more so than someone who is a real threat to our society.

Really? Yet you carried on doing it?

You would seem to have assessed the risk, taken steps to reduce the possibility of harm and carried on.

Med Hughes would have weighed up the possibility of a blow out (check tyres and pressures regularly) or suspension failure (observe servicing intervals) of pedestrians crossing/cars pulling out of junctions etc (using COAST) and proceeded ahead - possibly for only a short stretch - while overtaking even.

Your comparison with juggling knives show you use the same risk assessment strategies!

_________________
Time to take responsibility for our actions.. and don't be afraid of speaking out!

weepej, you're dodging points again, don't think its going unnoticed.




Subsequent posts have been split off into here
Smeggy

Richard Hammond crashed at 300mph and survived (granted only just). You will surely say that that is completely different and that not an everyday situation. HOWEVER, it did support the SS rhetoric that the conditions play a much more important role than the speed itself. He was on a hazardless racetrack, with a specialised crash helmet with nothing to hit if he came off it other than grass. Even the accident was not caused by speed (granted it was probably an aggravating factor.)

So yes, if someone can survive a 300mph car crash, with the correct conditions, then 90mph can certainly be safe in a modern road car.

...which to me suggests an ulterior motive. If someone dodges points then it suggests that they know they can't defend their position, i.e. that their position is illogical. Surely someone wouldn't knowingly adopt an illogical position unless they had a hidden reason for doing so.

For example, some camera advocates know cameras don't work but support them anyway because they're anti-car; never mind the lives being lost, as long as drivers are suffering. Some "environmentalists" know AGW is a load of crap but support it anyway because they're anti-capitalism. They play dirty, rather than just saying "I'm anti-car" or "I'm anti-capitalism", presumably because they think they would otherwise lose the argument. Such deceptions are extremely unhelpful, selfish, pathetic and ultimately detrimental to all of us.

Sadly I would guess that a majority of the remaining camera advocates have an ulterior motive, so no amount of logical anti-camera argument will stop them from making their fanciful claims. IMHO there's no other way of accounting for the behaviour of some of the people we've had on here over the years.

_________________
Paul Smith: a legend.

"The freedom provided by the motor vehicle is not universally applauded, however: there are those who resent the loss of state control over individual choice that the car represents. Such people rarely admit their prejudices openly; instead, they make false or exaggerated claims about the adverse effects of road transport in order to justify calls for higher taxation or restrictions on mobility." (Conservative Way Forward: Stop The War Against Drivers)

I think there is some confusion here risk is the combination of:

environment (road, weather, etc.)
Vehicle (equipment, faults, ability)
driver (and of course other drivers or peds etc.)

so it is crazy to just look at one item in isolation.

Given that 10-20% of todays motorway traffic will be doing 90+ on the motorways and dual carriageway - its hardly comparable to doing 300mph on a track.

I've done police course on technically challenging B roads in the wet with a course limit of 85mph. Not as safe as 60mph, but not inherently unsafe.

Hughes would have done courses with a limit of 120 at least. maybe even 140 or 160.

You're absolutely right!

Your statement probably sums up very well what we have all been saying here at SS.

A speed camera does not measure a safe speed. It never has and never will.

It really pi$$es me off when people call them safety cameras!


It pains me to say it, because of his hypocrisy, but I may well have felt very safe as a passenger in Hughes's car that day.

_________________
The views expressed in this post are personal opinions and do not necessarily represent the views of Safe Speed.
You will be branded a threat to society by going over a speed limit where it is safe to do so, and suffer the consequences of your actions in a way criminals do not, more so than someone who is a real threat to our society.

Eh? Many individuals and organisations have control over one item and must look at it 'in isolation'.

For example, a driver can't control the road design; and a motor manufacturer can't control the driver; a local authority can only control the road design.

I guess you must mean something different?

_________________
Paul Smith
Our scrap speed cameras petition got over 28,000 sigs
The Safe Speed campaign demands a return to intelligent road safety

Right, I own a car, a rather smart German one actually, and I work in the City of London.

So your attempt to make me look like a lentil eating car hating hippy is a bit ridiculous frankly.

And I'm not dodging them either, I don't post in the day as I'm working.

Not safe though, or do they tell you the faster you go the safer it is?

I think they tell you to be very, very careful when going at those sort of speeds as doing so involves great potential for disaster.

Nobody goes faster unless it is safer. That's why we have 80mph traffic on motorways but not normally in town.

_________________
Paul Smith
Our scrap speed cameras petition got over 28,000 sigs
The Safe Speed campaign demands a return to intelligent road safety

Nobody, you sure about that?

I see people everyday going faster simply because they think it gets them there quicker.

It's an excellent broad generalisation, as you very well know. I shall not be having a semantic argument.



And how could you know any such thing?

I see the vast majority accurately adjusting their speed to suit the conditions.

_________________
Paul Smith
Our scrap speed cameras petition got over 28,000 sigs
The Safe Speed campaign demands a return to intelligent road safety

And how exactly do you know that? Did you ask them? Did you use equipment to measure their speed?

I find that comment bit ironic given one of your posts just above.

Paul: snap!

Given that I didn't need to look at my speedo, I had significantly more time to dedicate to observing the road, and planning my lines.

To be honest I was almost certainly safer that day at 60+++ mph into bends than I was on my normal commute to work. So why was that..?

I was in my green zone (i.e. riding well within my limits and still maintaining 100% accuracy)
I was being assessed.
I was actually judging the correct speed for the conditions, bike and me, not rellying on the speed limit to tell me if I was 'safe' or not.
I was dedicating my full attention to the task, not bimbling along looking at the scenery bored out of my skull wondering why this lovely B road has a 40mph limit.