Safe Speed Forums

I've had this week as holiday time as the sun has been shining and it's the first time out (almost) for my now much modded XJ900.

I have travelled through that junction every day this week on my way home (lots of friends in Feltham still), and I have witnessed what you describe EVERY night so far.

It's not always a Beemer of course, but the standard of driving at that point is abysmal.
If it wasn't for the fact I am already on an ART course in Basingstoke, I'd dearly love to get off the bike and kick their stupid f***ing heads in in the hope it might educate them.

The poor driving isn't just at that junction though.
You still get the numpties speeding up once it goes back to 3 lanes, and then slamming the anchors on just before the next SPECS camera again...that does bring a smile to my face though when I sit there and think "you f***ing thick twat, don't you know how SPECS works"

A little further on (all the way to J4 and probably beyond) it goes like this...

Lorries/coaches in L1 averaging about 60 and fairly congested
Some lorries/mainly cars in L2 averaging about 60, maybe slightly quicker but still very much congested

Captain F***WIT in L3 hammering past at 90mph plus


WTF is that shit all about?

_________________
What makes you think I'm drunk officer, have I got a fat bird with me?

A number on this board want harsher penaties for those who cannot be bothered to obtain a licence or do any of the repsonsible things which driving a car actually mean

It seems very wrong when a speeder on tot- up could be banned for between 6 and 12 months by virtue of a speed camera. I think this is part of the build up of anger at the way speeding is currently being enforced.





Policy in Durham is to do a check on all cars. If we have zero doubt that the car is not insured (a seriously defective heap ) - we remove and crush it with almost immediate effect.

If we have cause to believe oversight or a fail in the databank - we give 7 days to provide all documents - including a licence.

In other words - we do not confiscate and crush without being 100% sure of our facts

It does work as our RPU is always on the prowl along with ANPR



Ah - speed cushions

Not easy to judge a speed. It would seem "faster". But even if say 40 mph - it's way too fast down a residential in any case.

Have you asked the police to target these unlicenced drivers? Asked them to fully audit this road with a view to "catching some real criminals" ?

Why is it being used as a rat -run? Perhaps you could lobby for a chicane at the mouths of the road to try to make the road seem less welcoming to these idiots from the outset?

By the way


John's usually fair minded. I think it's the "stereotyping". Personally I find most drivers of obvious repmobiles of all makes do need lessons in time management and manners And COAST!

_________________
Take with a chuckle or a grain of salt
Drive without COAST and it's all your own fault!

A SMILE is a curve that sets everything straight (P Diller).

A Smiley Per post
FINES USfor our COAST!

Approach love and cooking with reckless abandon - but driving with a smile and a COAST calm mind.

Mainly because 'members' do not represent official spokespeople for the campaign. We all have our own opinions on a variety of topics, the main thing uniting us is a desire for safer roads.

We tend to run into the biggest problems when people assume that anyone with a donors tag next to their name represents official SS policy, please don't make that mistake.

That's a good question, but fortunately it is one that neither policy nor the Safe Speed campaign needs to answer. It's a bit like: how do you cure world poverty? Everyone would like to do it, but there's no realistic or immediate answer.

The objective of policy and the Safe Speed campaign is to ensure that things are a little bit better next year than this year, hopefully across the whole board.

Proper messages, proper roads policing, and improved access to training will deliver the systematic safety improvements that are a realistic and practical objective.

Coming back to your 'moron'...

- Firstly, there's plenty of evidence that intelligence isn't required to make a safe driver. For a start we have about 50% of the population with 'below average intelligence', and it isn't 'only the stupid ones' who crash.

- Secondly, effective roads policing is likely to identify most 'moronic drivers' before they crash. Then we have the chance to work on banning or educating them. In many cases, I expect, education would be of significant benefit.

- Thirdly, a good policy would focus attention on the crash prone. There are about 1,000 crashes per fatality and about 10 crashes per injury so we have ample opportunity to identify most risky drivers before they cause injury, let alone death.

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

that's nice but my point is that these tales always seem to be "I was driving along minding my own business when some c*nt in a bmw tried to kill me/run over babies/whatever". Now unless you are all living in a completely different world to me there are a whole lot of substandard drivers out there and they are not confined to just bmws - even Mr Vista said so. So why do people feel the need to point out the evil bmw driver? Why do they even feel the need to mention the make of car? Is it in any way relevant to the standard of driving? Do you think it's any better than the 4x4 bashing that goes on?

ps: I'm travelling through France at the moment (quite enjoying (a) the driving standards on motorways and (b) the ogling my evil car is getting), so if I disappear it's due to lack of wireless.

I don't believe he did because there was no emphasis on the make of car. He merely told it as it was.

Would you have reacted in the same way if he had instead said the vehicle in question was an Audi, Volvo or a Range Rover?

again, the point is that nobody ever does. Well, not quite true. People are quite fond of talking about "planet killing" Range Rovers being used by lazy parents to ferry their even lazier and fatter children the few hundred metres from home to school.

John, you have a BMW, we get it, big deal! The guy made a factual observation, and you've blown it out of all proportion, making out that the rest of the driving world is against BMWs and their owners!

So is that a no?

Click search to get to the search page, type in all the major marques into the text box, select the ‘near misses and crashes’ forum, click the search button, view the threads and see what text is highlighted.
I think you’ll find that ‘BMW’ does not fair particularly badly.

It's just stereotyping, in much the same way that the Volvo driver is a prat where motorcyclists are concerned.

Having said that, some dizzy blonde decided that she needed 3 out of the 4 available lanes to circumnavigate the roundabout at the bottom of the slip road on J4 of the M3 this evening (pushing me over in the process).....and unfortunately for you, she was in an X5

_________________
What makes you think I'm drunk officer, have I got a fat bird with me?

Where I live the evil drivers drive a varied set of wheels. Yet where my sister just moved from in Wolverhampton a BMW was a badge of status. A well respecting accountant would not buy a BMW because it had a negative badge of status.

I live 20 miles from Portsmouth, I spent an evening in the backstreets of the city and was amazed just how different the culture was. There was constant noise, street deals going on , modded cars bombing up and down. a tension between locals and students.

The point I am clumsily trying to make is that there are local spots with their own culture. The BMW is part of a drugs sub-culture to some and a fantastic driving machine to another sub-culture. To the solicitors and accountants it is a status symbol and to the crims it is fast cheap reliable wheels. It all depends how old, where and who is driving it.

_________________
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

Can I remind everyone, and if you watch Top Gear you may remember this in one of the programmes, the one of the most successful things BMW has done in the last 20'ish years is transform themselves from a luxury brand to a populist quality brand. Where 20 years ago everyone complained about the Sierra drivers and 10 years ago it was Mondeo Man, because of the popularity of those cars, it is now BMW because of the total quantity of them on the roads.

Please everyone take a chill pill and realise that your marque is yours because it does the job you want it to whether that be a small hatchback to nip to the shops or a hawking great Warrior for transporting tools.

Yes I drive a BMW but before that I had a Polo, a Renault 19, a Granada, a Datsun Sunny, a Chevette, a Capri and a Cavalier. All of them were bought for one reason or another and sometimes it was purely from necessity.

I can't remember who it was who mentioned it but they are right. By attempting to turn all motorists against 4x4's divide and conquer is starting and working. We mustn't let that happen or we might as well park our cars up and throw away the keys.

BTW, as an amusing aside, I was driving to work the other day when I heard a big booming exhaust and a dump valve hiss. Looking around I could see no Corsa's, Nova's, Saxo's or the like. I saw a Smart car pass me and looking in my side mirror I noticed the exhaust. My "prejudice" had lead me to assume the make of car.

_________________
Prepare to be Judged

Well, I saw a fine example this morning, driving along a fairly narrow suburban road, I slowed to stop at the red traffic lights and was overtaken by a VW PASSAT doing around 50mph (30 limit), which then drove straight though the red lights, fortunately without hitting anything. When I caught up with the car at the next set of lights I spotted that the driver was FEMALE. (She couldn't jump that set, as there were cars aleardy waiting and the lane to her right is for right turners only.

I shall be wary of both Passats and female drivers in future!

Agreed. But to me, as a car driver and motorcyclist, I treat them (along with Volvos, Minicabs, Taxis & 4x4's) with more caution than a Ford Galaxy, for example. It has been my experience that they are the most aggressive and dangerous drivers.

_________________
Pecunia Prius Equitas et Salus

I've read more than one post in the past where people on SS have said, in as many words, that it isn't the use of speed cameras per se but the ridiculous widespread abuse of them which is unfair/unsafe/mercenary/ineffective/dangerous etc.

This is why I qualified what I said by using the word "genuine" black spot and went on to mention the flashing signs rather than just prosecuting everyone, which I read on this site was proved to be more effective and fair abroad.

Speed cameras shouldn't carpet our land or be dotted every 200 yards from a black spot, mile after mile. But if they were magically all taken down overnight it would be open season on our roads. It pains me to say it but if someone can tell me how to deter the maniacs at Visaed's dangerous road spot more quickly and effectively than a speed camera, I'd like to hear it?

I am on SS's side, that's why I joined, but at the moment there is nothing currently available which could prevent or deter a manic from going too fast in the wrong place, time or situation. As always, the bad minority spoil it for the rest.

I think we are on the horns of a dilemma; the freedom of safe drivers to carry on driving safely verses a maniac's freedom to kill someone using a car. I could get done for doing 34mph in a 30 limit when it's safe to do so whereas a manic can get away with 50+ mph because he knows where the cameras are and constantly beats the system - until one day when it's too late and kills someone.

On an earlier point...

Have we got to the stage where we daren't say anything lest we be judged for being a liar or something 'ist? In this PC world, it's almost impossible to tell any story without sounding like there's a dig at someone, or some-thing, so are we all just to keep stum for fear of reprisal?

I don't regard myself as any kind of ?'ist although I do make judgements on certain things based on my life's experience - like we all do.

If your child is bitten by a Bull Staff every time she comes across one you are likely to make a judgement on that breed of dog even if, as we know, they are not all biters of children. It may be that people who want a Bull Staff warm to the image and reputation of that dog and so it is the few men which gives the dog a bad name, maybe like the BMW/Subaru scenario?

There's a good reason why Micra drivers don't generally have a bad reputation - it's a poodle in the car world. Any sensible person would know that not all BMW drivers are maniacs but I hope you will concede that it is possible that some rouges will cleave to a certain Make/Model because of the image.

Generalisations are just that, but I don't think we should all be straight-jacketed into not speaking our minds if our experience on any topic seems to indicate a trend.

_________________
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.

It wasn't 'open season' before we had speed cameras, so that's deeply illogical.



And the evidence that speed cameras 'deter the maniacs' is...

At the very best they divert the maniacs while also distracting everyone else from government through police to every individual driver.

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

True, and that includes speed cameras. For two resons

1. Speed cameras do not some how magically apply the brakes of any speeding car that passes them. It is eminently possible to speed past a camera, as the millions of pounds collected in fines every year will testify.

2. Speed cameras are incapable detecting vehicles that are being driven "too fast", since the definition of too fast changes from moment to moment. If by "too fast" you mean "dangerously fast", then a speed camera cannot determine that. OK you can set your camera to flash at a speed that is guaranteed always to be dangerous in the situation where it is located, but mostly they are set to speeds much lower than that, ie speeds that are sometimes dangerous. A police officer can tell the difference between dangerous speeding and safe driving. A camera cannot.!

Well, no, actually, it isn't even remotely true.

The first 'prevent or deter' route is obviously effective roads policing.

The second is education - those who truly understand aren't maniacs in the first place.

The third is communication. Presently - and largely because of speed cameras - we're failing to communicate the standards of skill and responsibility that we should expect from road users.

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

My take on this, is: If Safety cameras were genuine, or where there was a real, pressing need to curtail the speed of drivers, then cameras wouldn't be in a particular 'blackspot'. The positioning of the camera doesn't prevent drivers going too fast - it just allows people to exceed the posted limit and just charge them £60 for doing so. If there was a real safety need, another solution would be in place, such as redesign of the road.

_________________
Pecunia Prius Equitas et Salus

Problem is the use of cameras as a substitute for traffic cops for the last ten years has (in my observed opinion) changed driver behaviour for the worse.

So in the short term, even if the number of trafpol was increased simultaneously, I think it would be to an extent 'open season' until the deterrent effect of the extra trafpol started to kick in.