Safe Speed Forums

How would you improve road safety, given current budgets, constraints, etc?

http://www.safespeed.org.uk/manifesto.html

Since that was written, it has become clear that we have a growing 'rogue driver' problem. It's got so big that it's hard to know where the resources could come from to address it. This is a consequence of a decade's neglect. I think it probably jumps up the importance of putting third party insurance costs on fuel, then maybe we can use the current uninsured driving resources to target the rest of the rogues.

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

There needs to be some way of preventing people from without a driving licence purchasing a car, owning one or even borrowing one. Pretty impossible. It may take something like preventing the private sale of all motor vehicles to change things or having a sale method similar to house purchasing which checks out the buyer in some way to make sure they are able to own a car and can drive. Perhaps all cash sales for cars could be stopped and only approved methods of sale should be allowed with some verification procedure used at the DVLA to prove you have bought the car legitimately and can drive it legally.

There are no consequences worth mentioning for driving without a licence. There needs to be some way of physically stopping people that have no licence or are banned from even getting in a car. Tagging seems to be the only possibility, but with prisons full there are few consequences to driving when you shouldn't as you can't send everyone that breaks the regime to prison.

The dvla records are a farce as they don't reflect just how many vehicles aren't properly registered. Removing automated policing and relying on traffic cops would probably help but there are just so many rogues out there that may not be enough. It may come down to members of the public ratting on people they know that drive without insurance or while banned.

Road safety has to start in schools. Pedestrians need to know to look for safe crossing places. Drivers need to know to look for errant pedestrians. It's all to do with co-operation but that has been lost and replaced with a more competative idea. All the bumph from HMG goes on about buses, cyclists, peds and cars all 'competing' for road resources rather than the same groups 'sharing' the resources. It's a semantic argument but it does make it 'us and them' rather more than it should.

One of the problems created by the 'cash-camera-points' system is that the points are given for such minor offences that disqualification is widespread and often unjustified.
When I was younger, to be disqualified you had to really deserve it. The traffic police were very discretionary and more sensible back then. No 'spiteful' cameras existed. Anyone I knew who had been disqualified really deserved it and did not even think of driving at all during the period of the ban. Now, however, someone banned for getting 12 points, each 3 of which was for just over some arbitrary limit in otherwise safe conditions, will feel agrieved and may well be tempted. The sheer volume of those being banned under this regime has 'devalued' the penalty in the eyes of many. In other words, the 'road-safety, speed-kills' lobby are reaping what they have sowed. Right or wrong, that's what is happening. Until we get disqualification only for the more serious and genuinely road-safety related offences, then the numbers DWD will just increase. Whilst the 'Cash-Cameras' proliferate, DWD will continue to increase and no 'knee-jerk' reactions will reduce it. A requirement for 'proof-of-fitness' before buying will do nothing to reduce this either. Most of those DWD already have or had cars when the points reached 12. A large proportion of new cars are company purchases anyway, and the 'red-tape' applying to companies is already way too much.

in theory a good idea, but i think this will push up the number of drive off's, if they cannot be bothered to get insured i doubt if they will stop to pay for petrol

i have noticed a lot of anpr operations around, where the cars which are stopped are sometimes taken away, i would imagine due to insurance and or other offences

People who do not drive may have a motability allowance .. which allows them to run a car with a driver for their own use. Registered blind or a diabetic who lost his licence due to the condition.. but as a sole trader runs a car and insures it for family and two employees to use it.


Collectors will also buy and own "classics".. but this does not necessarily mean these cars are driven. I would not contemplate driving the Trabi or the Imp in the garage here (belong to one of the crazier Swiss guys.. I have the space.. much to my embarrassment at having these excuses for a car on my property . 'Orrid cars and really there to show the naffness against quality But as exhibits.. darned good examples of the worst ever car made ,.. unless anyone knows different




I usually check out licence and respective insurance clauses if negotiating a sale and a test drive. No way is the person allowed to drive off and I keep just enough petrol for around the block in the tank if selling

Auctions.. especially those specialising in old bangers do need regulating though as this is where these thugs buy these dangerous chavmobiles.






As said .. if I am selling a car privately and the person asks for a test drive.. I either drive myself .. with Wildy following us.. or I request documents ...I call it being safety conscious and wary of "runners" I do not sell often.. but sometimes I may decide to sell one of the vintages if made an offer I could not refuse and have my "roving car" eye on another beauty.



Slight problem there .. what if they are a passenger (Pedant mode Ooops.. I know what you mean ..as in "driving seat" ..

It is a tough one.. and I suppose we are back to the age old argument of more policemen .. the type that was generally regarded with awe and respect when I was a boy. Along with a return to values which respect the laws and common courtesy and decency.



Decent cops rely on decent intelligence.. but if we report these idiots.. we at least want a speedy response. Perhaps a better system with a real admin back up to take care of all that tedious paperwork. Come to think of it.. NHS needs the same back up admin teams




Yep.. it's really back to that COAST backed up by Amey's Road Craft, Dr Walker of Bath Uni and John Franklin who say more or less the same message .. but in a book form Observing, anticipating, negotiating and co-operating with the others on the planet.

Only .. each group of road users seems so selfish... and one handful who post Greenspeak tripe seem even more selfish and silly than most

_________________
If you want to get to heaven - you have to raise a little hell!

Smilies are contagious
They are just like the flu
We use our smilies on YOU today
Now Good Causes are smiling too!

KEEP SMILING
It makes folk wonder just what you REALLY got up to last night!

Smily to penny.. penny to pound
safespeed prospers-smiles all round! !
But the real message? SMILE.. GO ON ! DO IT! and the world will smile with you!
Enjoy life! You only have the one bite at it.

I'd be way of any suggestion of "looking to prevent a disqualified driver from driving the car" as you know exactly how this government will implement such a suggestion.

Link the ID cards database to the motor insurance database and the DVLA database and have a smartcard reader instead of or in addition to the key.

Shove the card in and the car makes a GPRS call (at your cost) to check you have a licence and are insured and if you pass then it unimmobilises the car. They'll probably also have it broadcast the driver details for billing purposes.


This, of course, means that only criminals will have cars that don't need a smartcard to start, also if you park in an area with no signal, you'll have to get the RAC to tow you to the nearest town before you start the car again as whoever designs the system will probably not think of that situation. Also no-one will be able to drive on new years as the GSM network will be congested with drunken phone calls.

I've heard someone say on one of the motoring forums that in America, you pay for petrol before you're allowed to fill up. Not sure how it works in terms of knowing how much you can fill until the tank is full, but I'd guess that it does the job of stopping drive offs.

This is possibly going to sound a bit jaundiced and, some may say, a bit fatuous but:-

We seem to be able to afford to put large numbers of troops and resources in Iraq, Afghanistan and wherever Georgie Dubya tells Our Tone will be our next 'Global Threat' (hopefully Washington DC), but we have a few scant pennies to overstretch our own Police Force on the roads, where they are direly needed...
Does anyone else see that this equation is very seriously unbalanced, or is it just me?






Probably...















Mais c'est le guerre...
















Ho Hum...

_________________
Aquila



Licat volare si super tergum aquila volat...

Yeah that's what happened in Florida. Pay with credit card at the pump (except I couldn't because it asked for my ZIP code and I don't have one) or pay cash to the person in the shop. I think you can 'overpay' and then go back in for change. The pump stops once it reaches the amount you paid.

I remember a place in France where you fill up then drive up to a kiosk to pay on the way out.

_________________
Andrew.

For the zip code, try just enetering the numerical parts of your postcode.

And as for the pay and then drive to a kiosk, we have them here too, the Asda in Bromborough being an example. Doesn't stop someone reversing out in quiet times though. (Liverpool also has it's fair share of pay-first garages, but I don't think they have the facility to cancel the pump if you go over. My regular garage knew me anyway, and knew I paid with a card, so they'd just authorise the pump as soon as I pulled up. I guess it was just procedureal rather than technical.

They have a similar system HERE as well.
It works very simply, you hand your card over before you fill up, if the card isn't valid...you don't get to fill up AND the card is kept.

They are planning to bring in road charging. I don't agree with this scheme but the tracking devices could be useful for other purposes in cutting crime.

Of course you can't beat every case but certain devices that could be put into new cars might certainly significantly cut car-related crimes.

I do not agree necessarily with "ID cards" as such but certainly driving licences could be given some activating device that would allow a car to be driven, and could also match a driver to a car.

Tracking driver's locations should not be abused, but might be useful to solve serious crimes where a car has been used - robberies and even abductions. It would cut the need for car chases as it would be possible to trace exactly where the driver is going.

Sorry mate, but that's tosh!

The forces are waaaay overstretched, operating with antiquated, and in many cases inadequate, equipment. People are banging out left, right and centre because of the way they are (not) looked after. It all comes down to lack of funding.

Don't tell the Argies, but there's no way we could repeat the Falklands for at least 5-10 years after a complete pull-out from both Iraq and Afghanistan. Whats the point in the forces if we cannot even defend our own territories?!

If you are looking for the place that our national funds are being misspent then the Armed Forces is not it. I suggest setting your sights on quangos and mismanaged IT projects instead!

IIRC there's a supermarket filling station in York Road, Leeds where they use that system. I think it might have been an ASDA site, but I'm not sure.

Best wishes all,
Dave.

Theres definitely one in Kirkaldy, Fife, where I did my bike training.

Which is exactly how it works for HGVs - most (if not all) filling stations will have notices by the HGV pumps that state you must take your fuel card to the kiosk before the pump can be authorised. When you're looking to lose potentially £500 per wagon....

The trouble you do get with this system, particularly at busy times, is that the driver must queue twice - once to leave the card and once to complete the transaction. The solution to this might be to have all pumps operate a 'pay at pump' system whereby you can insert the card / cash to aurhorise the pump and then complete the transaction as normal in the kiosk?

Either that or have hydraulic jacks beside each pump that lift the car off the ground in the event the driver tries to leave without paying

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

Interesting idea Sixy!

Would probably not be cost-prohibitive to install those 'severe tyre damage ahead' ramps that they have in some car parks in front of each pump. When the pump is authorised to begin delivery the ramps could be raised, and not lowered until payment has been made.

These could probably only be justified at existing stations where they have a particular problem with drive-offs, but should not add much to the cost of constructing a new station.

Just to briefly drift back to the original question:


If I were the Road Safety Minister..............I'd resign!

_________________
It's tricky doing nothing - you never know when you're finished

Answering the original question I would probably go for upgrading major trunk roads to all be at least D2 (dual carriageway, 2 lanes in each direction). I would probably make the speed limit on other good single carriageway roads 50mph for all, i.e. for HGVs and cars alike.

I would bring in laws restricting the hours for taxi and private hire (minicab) drivers. These would probably match bus and HGV driving hours (which has a maximum number of hours without a break, maximum per day with a bigger break and maximum per 2-week period). For London I would probably change the role of the minicab operators thus they would no longer hire drivers, who would instead work directly under the Public Carriage Office. The operators can remain to get in business. Drivers would be tested on road knowledge and be expected a higher level of driving (but the knowledge wouldn't quite be as intent as that for black cab drivers) and they would be allowed in some cases to use a street atlas or satellite navigation system.

I would make certain periods of the day lorry-free on most roads. Preferably the lorry drivers could be trained to drive buses too - sure they could manage it - and would be doing just that during these hours thus increasing the number of buses on the roads during the peak hours. It would be interesting to know if there could be a "transit" style of vehicle that could be converted between lorry (carrying goods) and bus (carrying passengers). This should help to solve some of the congestion problems. For the benefit of lorries I might make them exempt from congestion charging (but they wouldn't be able to drive in during peak times due to their ban at that time, but they could drive in during the hours in the middle).

Although the above is more of a congestion issue rather than a safety issue, I think that fewer conflicts between lorry and car drivers would probably make the roads safer.