Safe Speed Forums

The campaign for genuine road safety
It is currently Mon Dec 18, 2017 06:17

All times are UTC [ DST ]




Post new topic This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies.  [ 57 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3
Author Message
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Jan 09, 2005 19:28 
Offline
Friend of Safe Speed
Friend of Safe Speed

Joined: Sat Mar 06, 2004 12:01
Posts: 4813
Location: Essex
Good passage on your websile, Peter. sums it up nicely. As for underage sex, if you can wait just three months... :wink:


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Jan 09, 2005 22:53 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Sat Mar 06, 2004 06:46
Posts: 16903
Location: Safe Speed
Cunobelin wrote:
Why is this incorrect!

That is a bold statement that can be disputed and commonly is!

Whether or not an individual is driving safely or inappropriately (again the important question is as to in whose opinion) is irrelevant.

These limits exist because so many drivers have an overestimated idea of their own abilities and drive fast where it is unacceptable there are speed limits. Locally here we have just introduced traffic calming ( - the speed past the local school at colllection tme was averaging 42 mph (max 54mph) despite the 30mph zone! There is also support from many parents for a local campaign for a speed camera for resident's use.)

I have no doubt all these drivers thought they were driving safely and at an appropriate speed. The fact is that because of them there inow traffic calming to enforce a posted speed limit.

A speed limit is a legal restriction on the activity - travelling faster than this is an offence. Speed, get caught, pay fine - it's simple mathematics.

Quote:
Speed cameras do not detect inappropriate speed


There is a legal limit, (not open to personal interpretation as to whether you will decide to obey it or not) - break the law by exceeding that limit is by definition inappropriate.

Obey the law, and there is no problem.


I'm keen to provide a comprehensive reply, but despite Roger's assistance, I'm having trouble separating out the real questions or points of disagreement from uninteresting definition problems.

My view are published and explained on the main web site. Perhaps it would be more efficient and effective if you examined one or more of the following pages to find any critical point of disagreement:

http://www.safespeed.org.uk/why.html
http://www.safespeed.org.uk/speedlimits.html
http://www.safespeed.org.uk/againstcameras.html
http://www.safespeed.org.uk/speeding.html
http://www.safespeed.org.uk/roadsafety.html

If this isn't working for you, feel free to ask any plain, direct and well defined questions.

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


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Jan 15, 2005 11:53 
Offline
Suspended
Suspended

Joined: Sat Apr 17, 2004 13:41
Posts: 539
Location: Herts
Quote:
there are a number of people who fail to do so (hence the number of responsible drivers being "victimised" for failing to comply) ]


This is a question of priority, thousands of drivers are fined for driving just above the speed limit.

Why :?:

Prior to Speed cameras:
We drive around the limits, we had ample Traffic officers to deal with excessive speed & dangerouse drivers.

After Speed cameras:

We have drivers studying their speedo, and not the impending hazards to avoid being fined, we have reduced traffic police, in fact next to none in some areas, thus increasing the number of excessive speed & dangerouse drivers, as they go unchecked.

My priority, when i am driving.

To make good progress, within the law, to maintain a safe standard and to keep a high standard of hazard awareness.

Whilst watching for hazards, my speed my tip over the Official Speed limit, especially in areas that contain a higher risk of hazard.

My attention is therefore more required at the road, pavement than at my speedo.

Hence a number of speeding convictions, and zero accidents.

So priority is safety, not watching my speedometer.

An accident at the speed limit is a far worse result, than no accident :!:

_________________
Steve


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Looking at the speedo:
PostPosted: Fri May 06, 2005 17:43 
Offline
User

Joined: Sat Apr 16, 2005 05:33
Posts: 62
Location: Derbyshire.
I know I've only been on the roads 25 years, never having an accident or endorsement (prior to trundling past a camera @ 35 mph at the bottom of a downhill stretch of dual carriageway which I now know to my cost was signed some distance back as "30")...

But I would have thought the odd glance 3 or 4 times a minute (ie 15 to 20 seconds between) rather than 1 time a second at my speed is safer.

Tell me. Would you rather step out in front of me doing 35mph but seeing you at the instant you stepped off the pavement OR seeing you a second or so after I'd glanced at my speedo for the 58th time that particular minute but only travelling at 30mph???

This is nothing to do with safety, it's to do with MONEY!

If it waddles, quacks and looks like a duck it probably is one: These people only insult my intellegence because they want to justify filching my money from me.

This is nothing more than theft by another name

_________________
Although I used to consider myself to be a "reasonable man", the law just sees me as a criminal... My uncontrolled anti-social activities solely include the undeniable fact I usually drive my car at or just below the 85th percentile.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue May 10, 2005 15:57 
Offline
New User
New User

Joined: Tue May 10, 2005 11:53
Posts: 1
My partner has been prosecuted for drink driving - at no time has he withheld or given incorrect information, however the police on their prosecution information have him detailed as driving totally the wrong car - he has at two court pre trials pleaded not quilty (Due to the incorrect car details, but hasnt said why) - and the police have attempted in correct their paper work, but they still have the incorrect vehicle details and it is now to go to trial - does anyone know what the outcome of a prosectution with incorrect information will be?
:(


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu May 12, 2005 17:34 
Offline
Life Member
Life Member
User avatar

Joined: Sat Apr 30, 2005 22:02
Posts: 3266
just to say that I used the PePiPoo web site after recieving a ticket from hants

They were pareked under a road sign beyond a junction. They "clocked me" for 53 in a 40. I had watched my speedo through a 50 gatso displaying 49 and reduced to 41 when I saw the hiden camera van.

I returned the nip with full details and waited for a summons. I also wrote to the CPS. the police sent me three demands for my liscence and £60
at no time did they back down but after 6 months no summons arrived.
I am very greatfull to the help and support of the PePiPoo website
Thanks to them I can still insure my 1965 tr4 on classic car insurance.
when my disabled wife wanted me to fold and take a wrongfull hit.
Anton


Last edited by anton on Sat Jun 25, 2005 14:10, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Jun 06, 2005 11:21 
Offline
User

Joined: Fri May 27, 2005 15:13
Posts: 269
Cunobelin wrote:

{snip}

Whether or not an individual is driving safely or inappropriately (again the important question is as to in whose opinion) is irrelevant.

{snip}

I have no doubt all these drivers thought they were driving safely and at an appropriate speed. The fact is that because of them there is now traffic calming to enforce a posted speed limit.

A speed limit is a legal restriction on the activity - travelling faster than this is an offence. Speed, get caught, pay fine - it's simple mathematics.

Quote:
Speed cameras do not detect inappropriate speed


There is a legal limit, (not open to personal interpretation as to whether you will decide to obey it or not) - break the law by exceeding that limit is by definition inappropriate.

Obey the law, and there is no problem.


I have a couple of questions and observations for Cunobelin....

I have absolutely NO objection to a VIDEO camera following someone's progress along a roadway IF the recording made shows the target vehicle concerned to be driven by a plonker regardless of the speed involved. For example, at school turn out time, where most people are passing the said school at around 20MPH, cautiously; if and when 'our hero' comes into shot tailgating at 2 feet behind some poor so and so, flashing his lights and sounding his horn to "get out of the way", I would approve 1,000% of such camera use.

But the thing is, in the example above, 'our hero' hasn't actually exceeded the speed limit, so according to your logic that's ok. HOWEVER, later that evening (say at 9pm), on the way back from a visit to friends, "Mr Perfectly Orinary-Considerate-&-Normal" gets flashed doing 37MPH past the same place.

Something, at least to my mind, is very wrong here.

Point 2: "You say obey the law at all times". Have you EVER realised you have taken a biro home from work and not taken it back? Well if you have, then you're a tea-leaf! As the maximum penalty for theft in this country is a £10,000 fine AND / OR 10 years in prison, how would you feel about it if a "NIP" hit your doormat, followed by a conditional £500 fine and 6 weeks in prison - no further questions asked?

I mean, from your posts, you don't seem like a cleptomaniac (just like most posters on here who have transgressed the absolute demands of the law don't come across me like wannabe Michael Schumakers), but you never know, eh?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jun 16, 2005 01:56 
Offline
New User
New User

Joined: Thu Jun 16, 2005 01:19
Posts: 4
Location: Auckland, New Zealand
I would like to give Cunobelin a real example of where exceeding the posted speed limit enhances road safety.

Although British, I've lived in New Zealand for the past four years and up until very recently, I owned a 450hp Mitsubishi. Although New Zealand's roughly the size of the UK it's population is just 4 million people; under half of the population of London. The vast majority of the roads are single-carriageway, often with a chip-seal surface. There is a national open-road speed limit of of 100km/h.

On certain major highways, over-taking tends to occur only within marked over-taking lanes. In these, the road is briefly widened to three lanes, with two dedicated to traffic going in one direction. Prior warning of an impending overtaking lane is given 2km, then 1km before the lane. The lanes have no fixed length. The longest is over five kilometres. The shortest I know of is about 300 metres. Two hundred metres before the end of the lane is a warning sign indicating the lane is about to come to an end.

Not so long ago, on a trip country, I was unfortunate enough to come up behind fully-laden logging trucks, each carrying 45 tons of wood. I was on a hilly twisty section of road and had to follow these trucks at speeds between 80km/h and 20km/h. Having seen a sign for an overtaking lane coming up, I waited, then began overtaking the three trucks keeping roughly to the legal 100km/h limit. This particular overtaking lane went round a left-hand bend. Because I was overtaking the trucks I did not, and could not, see the sign indicating the lane was to end in 200 metres. Only on rounding the bend was I able to see the end of the lane, at which point I was level with the rear of the first truck in the convoy.

Although it wasn't a conscious decision, I decided to drop a gear or two and put my foot down to overtake the last truck before the end of the lane. By the time I finished the overtaking move, I was doing roughly 140 km/h and had passed an unmarked police car travelling in the other direction, who promptly turned round and issued me with a ticket.

My use of speed in excess of the posted limit was entirely justified for one very simple reason. It was the safest method of avoiding danger that was open to me at the time. As I could not complete the overtaking move at 100km/h, I would have had to brake, then try to slot in between two 45 ton trucks doing roughly 80km/h and who were travelling just twenty metres apart. Utilising a negative speed differential to insert oneself into a gap is significantly harder than utilising a positive one. Inserting myself into the gap would have caused the second truck in the convoy to brake to increase his stopping distance. Should I have had to take evasive action immediately after inserting myself into the gap, I would have had to risk a 45 ton truck running into the back of me.

Cunobelin; your argument seems to revolve around the unbending principle that you have nothing to worry about provided you are travelling within the legal limit. In my case, blindly obeying the legal limit would have resulted in significantly increased danger for myself and other road users. My selective and entirely safe use of speed was designed to minimise risk.

Needless to say, my argument was rejected by the office at the time, and by the courts later on in the process. $340 fine and (the equivalent) of five penalty points.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Jun 29, 2005 12:49 
Offline
User
User avatar

Joined: Sat Apr 23, 2005 08:22
Posts: 2618
This whole issue makes me angry beyond words.

I THINK I was nicked last Friday for speeding (approximately 47 in a 40 limit) and to be quite honest I'm terrified of getting 3 points on my licence - at 24 you can imagine the consiquences for my insurance. All I can do now is wait! :(

From where I was sat I was flowing with the traffic, therefore not posing a direct hazard to anyone as there are no footpaths on the road in question, and ample visibilty.

So I conceed that yes I was probably breaking the law (car speedos only being accurate to within about 10%), but I was NOT driving dangerously, and by having 3 points on my licence for the next 4 years I might as well have a big neon sigh saying "Bad Driver!" over my car. Also, as a result of seeing the camera, my reaction (along with everyone else on the road) was to imediately forget everything else going on and look at the speedo. This resulted in a large bunch of tailgating traffic travelling slowly (well BELOW 40) past the mobile unit.

Since in Wiltshire, these mobile units are actually advertised as "Safety" cameras, then I can't see the benifit of them AT ALL! In my opinion they actually reduce road safety. :x

And to all you "you're speeding therefore you're breaking the law" lot, I sat my big bike test (500cc) 3 years ago, and I was actually TOLD OFF by the EXAMINER for NOT speeding. :!: I was turning right off a three lane dual carrageway with a 50 limit, and being on my test I was doing 50. There was traffic coming up behind me well in excess of the speed limit as I tried to move over into lane 3 (and no I didn't cut in, the traffic had plenty of warning and time to react - I would have failed my test then and there had I actually done something dangerous). Therefore by moving over at the speed limit I was posing far more of a hazard than by increasing my speed as I forced the speeding driver to slow down. When we got back to the testing centre the examiner told me that in that instance, ignore the speed limit and get out of danger.

Just because you exceed the speed limit, does not mean that you are driving dangerously. Doing 45 in lane 1 of a busy motorway is significantly more dangerous than doing 90 in lane 3 (obviously depending on conditions and cercumstances) and doing 70 in the fog is suicidal, but legal. :twisted:

Open your eyes and see the bigger picture. You cannot quantify road safety with numbers.

_________________
Science won over religion when they started installing lightning rods on churches.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Jun 29, 2005 13:27 
Offline
Gold Member
Gold Member

Joined: Mon Mar 15, 2004 15:43
Posts: 2416
Sixy_the_red wrote:
This whole issue makes me angry beyond words.

I THINK I was nicked last Friday for speeding (approximately 47 in a 40 limit) and to be quite honest I'm terrified of getting 3 points on my licence - at 24 you can imagine the consiquences for my insurance. All I can do now is wait! :(

There's a fair chance you won't have been pinged for this. They allow a margin of 10%+2mph over the limit, so enforcement starts at 10%+3 which in a :40: is 47 mph. Speedos can be 10% out as you say, but they must not underread. In other words, a speedo should never indicate 47mph if the car is going faster than that, but may indicate 47mph when the car is really going slower. You might well have been going below the 10%+3 threshold. Cross your fingers for a couple of weks, or alternatively, if you know someone with an Origin B2 or other GPS system that can accurately measure your speed you can try and borrow it and find out exactly how accurate your speedo is at that speed.

If you do get a NIP I suggest having a look at the forums at http://www.pepipoo.com where they will be able to give you advice should you choose to fight it.

Welcome to the forums BTW. Everything else you said is just what we've been saying.

_________________
Make everything as simple as possible, but not simpler - Einstein


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Jun 30, 2005 08:28 
Offline
User
User avatar

Joined: Sat Apr 23, 2005 08:22
Posts: 2618
[quote="Gatsobaitif you know someone with an Origin B2 or other GPS system that can accurately measure your speed you can try and borrow it and find out exactly how accurate your speedo is at that speed.[/quote]

Slaps self repeatedly :banghead: - I've got a handheld GPS Duh! Cheers for the advice, I'll give it a try! And thanks for the welcome - I've been reading the forums for a while, but only just started posting...

_________________
Science won over religion when they started installing lightning rods on churches.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Jul 28, 2005 10:32 
Offline
User
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jul 27, 2005 17:53
Posts: 16
Cunobelin wrote:
I am not allowed to burgle your house, but if I do not feel this applies to me would you support my decision, would you also object to a CCTV camera being used as evidence in the prosecution?


Not at all.

I would object to being sent a letter accusing me of burgling a house, inviting me to name the burglar, or admit to the burglary, and telling me that if I do neither, I will go down anyway for the same length of time for refusing to assist the police.... :?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Jul 28, 2005 10:38 
Offline
Member
Member

Joined: Thu Mar 11, 2004 00:24
Posts: 2400
Location: Kendal, Cumbria
Gatsobait wrote:
Sixy_the_red wrote:
This whole issue makes me angry beyond words.

I THINK I was nicked last Friday for speeding (approximately 47 in a 40 limit) and to be quite honest I'm terrified of getting 3 points on my licence - at 24 you can imagine the consiquences for my insurance. All I can do now is wait! :(

There's a fair chance you won't have been pinged for this. They allow a margin of 10%+2mph over the limit, so enforcement starts at 10%+3 which in a :40: is 47 mph.


That's not quite right actually. The ACPO guidelines say that 10%+2 is the lowest speed at which prosecution will start, not the highest speed which is allowable.

So if a scamera measures your speed as 46 in a 40 you WILL get a ticket.

_________________
CSCP Latin for beginners...
Ticketo ergo sum : I scam therefore I am!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Jul 28, 2005 13:14 
Offline
Gold Member
Gold Member

Joined: Mon Mar 15, 2004 15:43
Posts: 2416
JT, I may have misread something that camera operator said on the 10%+2 guidleine elsewhere. I know a lot of people who think that 10%+3 is safe (ticket wise), but I was sure they're all mistaken and that 10%+3 was where prosecution began. If it's actually safe to drive up to 10%+1 and prosecution starts above that I think some of them are in trouble :shock: .

By the way, Sixy_the_red, have you had a NIP over this yet? It's been well over two weeks,

_________________
Make everything as simple as possible, but not simpler - Einstein


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Jul 28, 2005 15:43 
Offline
Police Officer and Member
Police Officer and Member

Joined: Thu Dec 09, 2004 22:53
Posts: 565
Location: Kendal
Gatsobait wrote:
JT, I may have misread something that camera operator said on the 10%+2 guidleine elsewhere. I know a lot of people who think that 10%+3 is safe (ticket wise), but I was sure they're all mistaken and that 10%+3 was where prosecution began. If it's actually safe to drive up to 10%+1 and prosecution starts above that I think some of them are in trouble :shock: .

By the way, Sixy_the_red, have you had a NIP over this yet? It's been well over two weeks,

Acpo guidelines are that prosecution starts at 10% + 2, not above,
So 35 in a 30
46 in a 40
57 in a 50
68 in a 60
79 in a 70
are the minimum speeds for prosecution, although Lancs (and possibly some others) were offering speed awareness courses for 33 and 34mph up 'til recently.

IIRC camera operator stated that their force policy was a little more generous (perhaps above 10% +4) which would mean 38,49,60 etc.

_________________
Fixed ideas are like cramp, for instance in the foot, yet the best remedy is to step on them.

Ian


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Jul 28, 2005 22:31 
Offline
New User
New User

Joined: Wed Jun 29, 2005 19:54
Posts: 7
Location: Yorkshire
I would like to challenge cunobelin

Do you actually drive a car?

If you do can you swear on your mothers life you have NEVER broken a speed limit never gone at say 33/34 in a 30 for example.

If you are such a theoretically perfect driver then you must have a constant queue of frustrated motorists behind you.

And if you have never broken a speed limit when even Richard Brunstrom has admitted he has you are just a hypocrite for giving the holier than thou "if you dont speed you wont get caught" spiel.

Let us raise the standard of debate a bit. All of us are human and occasionally lapse slightly that doesn't mean we should be effectively criminalised if our speed is SAFE FOR THE CONDITIONS and we temporarily drift over the limit.

_________________
Mark


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Jul 28, 2005 22:57 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Sat Mar 06, 2004 06:46
Posts: 16903
Location: Safe Speed
Mark101 wrote:
I would like to challenge cunobelin


He hasn't been seen around these parts since January, I'm afraid. It's often wise to check the date of the post you're thinking about replying to.

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


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies.  [ 57 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3

All times are UTC [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 11 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
[ Time : 0.572s | 11 Queries | GZIP : Off ]