Safe Speed Forums

I don't post here often but I regularly lurk around. I also often have a look at the C+ forum, as it's interesting (once you've cut through some of the blinkered views and personal insults) to see a contrasting point of view on riding/driving, traffic and road safety in general.

One of the claims that is often raised on C+ is that SafeSpeed campaign for the abolition of speed limits and and that SafeSpeed advocates a "free for all" for motorists to drive at any speed they wish.

Unless I've missed something, I do not recall seeing anything on this forum or on the SafeSpeed site that supports this view.

Have I missed something

Didn't FRANCE once have such a system of "No Limits"?.....

But any Police Officer could decide that under the circumstances: AT THE TIME, that your driving was "reckless"? And I don't believe it was all that long ago!

No. It's crap. We've never called for the abolition of speed limits and constantly call for more police to enforce all road laws with appropriate intelligence and discretion. We think it's vital that the link between causing danger and law enforcement is always apparent. Anything less distorts safety priorities and brings the law into needless disrepute.

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

There are a group of trolls who inhabit C+ who take delight in deliberately misrepresenting statements.

All you need to know is within the manifesto:

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

Scroll halfway down to the section 'speed limits' for your answer.

_________________
Views expressed are personal opinions and are not necessarily shared by the Safe Speed campaign

only that those with weak arguements and bigoted views usually try to supplement them with lies and distortion.

The moderation on here is very good, providing a forum for discussion of topics with heated arguements and only intervening when remarks become stupid or personal. Too many moderators elsewhere either act too soon and leave those having an arguement having unfinished business- which inevitably boils up again elsewhere or have too little or bigoted moderation meaning debates generally descend into petty slanging matches or are locked if the "wrong side is winning."

_________________
Fear is a weapon of mass distraction

There are many things said over at C+. Fortunately most of them are from a small band of zealots:

Spindrift/Tabernacle/WavyDavy/Rothbrook (also slowcoach39 on PH)
Jaded
Mister Paul (Jub Jub on here)
Cunobelin
Tourist Tony
Gillian-something

Spindrift is the most troublesome, hes been banned from C+ many times but keeps coming back. Hes actually wished some pretty unpleasant things happen to Paul. In my opinion hes just a keyboard warrior without any real life to boast of.

The rest of the site is populated by normal people just like anyone else. The campaign section of C+ is completely overrun by the above posters, and they're obsessed with Paul. Unfortunately for them, most of C+ ignores them too.

Whats telling about their opinions is that they so often attack Paul directly, over his appearance, his dedication, and his message. They haven't really been able to contradict much of his evidence so they focus on ad hominem attacks. If they really had anything but road safety at heart, they'd attack the science - but they can't, because theres not much to attack. The evidence Paul has collected is quite conclusive IMO.

Don't forget the almost constant references to 6-year-old usenet posts and one old page on this site (which didn't contain anything that couldn't be found on sites such as the BBC). They really don't realise how desperate they look do they?

You'd think that if they meant what they said, they would be complaining about Pepipoo all the time. But as PoD says, the thing that really gets to them about SS is that they can't refute it, and it exposes their scamera support as unscientific.

You get people like that in life; they won't accept your side of the arguement, and don't give any leaway.

Welcome Mandat, well done for putting your 'toe in the water' and noting one of the great misunderstandings of the whole point of our community.
Intelligent road safety is about being responsible for yourself and your fellow travelers.
Someone who has enjoyed a 'large' night at the pub, whilst walking home, may well be a hazard to other road users in terms of his/her own safety, but the same person driving home in the same state is a hazard to all. As a drunk driver though, they could quite happily drive ten miles through any number of speed cameras and, as long as they were driving at less than the trigger limit, continue unmolested. Even if they did trigger a camera, no judgement could be made as to their fitness to drive from the camera evidence.
On the other hand, a police patrol would notice erratic driving behaviour and act accordingly, removing a probable KSI statistic from the books.
'Speeding' is a nice, easy little earner for the Treasury and they won't let go of it without a fight - even in the face of a statement from ACPO quoting a maximum involvement of 3 to 5% excess or inappropriate speed in all KSI's.
The C+ forum is the victim of 'positive trolling' in which some very disturbed individuals have, by quite clever infiltration posting, made themselves 'voices' of the site. Careful 'lurking' (as you have used with us) reveals their place in the minority of posters but, alas, their power in creating antipathy on 'enemy' sites.
There is no 'enemy' in this game - we are all road-users in common and exhibit respect for our various attributes or limitations.
The only 'enemies' are those that would profit from our traveling necessities whilst providing no positive support for us in our endeavours.

Let us all try to return road use to the pleasure it once was, instead of the beating from governmental sticks it has become...

_________________
Aquila



Licat volare si super tergum aquila volat...