Safe Speed Forums

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/4152841.stm

I would like some of your opinions, especially yours SafeSpeed.

I think this is absolutely disgusting!

Yes, the driving ban is indeed disgusting.

This has already been addressed in this thread

I am pleased that he was not faced with a trumped-up charge of "dangerous driving".

_________________
"Show me someone who says that they have never exceeded a speed limit, and I'll show you a liar, or a menace." (Austin Williams - Director, Transport Research Group)

Any views expressed in this post are personal opinions and may not represent the views of Safe Speed

Well he was clearly very lucky. That sort of driving can only be considered as being very dangerous!!!!

How do you know? He broke a law - he exceeded the speed limit. He may well have been safer than Mr Average doing 70 on the same road. The car is good; the driver masy have had high speed training and his observation skills may well be more than a match for the conditions of the road and hazard density at the time.

This jury didn't think 145mph was dangerous: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/303005.stm

You can't measure safe driving in miles per hour.

It's really highly likely that this chap's 136mph was safer than 30mph would have been in a nearby narrow village high street. Speed is important to safety, but 20mph can be murderously fast in the wrong conditions while 150mph can be a walk in the park in the right conditions.

I'd also note that that part of the A9 is comparable in quality to some German Autobahns where 150mph would be commonplace and completely legal.

I do however have quite significant reservations because it is reported that the road was wet at the time. How wet? Was there surface water? Neither do we know enough about the presence or behaviour of other traffic at the time.

The bottom line is that we cannot possibly judge if his driving was safe or not on the basis of the information avalable.

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

Very lucky?

You mean it only resulted in seriously injured rather than death?

_________________
http://www.itsyourduty.org.uk

You could apply that logic to someone going the wrong way up a dual carriageway. At what point does something like this become dangerous? Should laws be adhered too, or can they be ignored when our judgement tells us it's safe to ignore them? Don't you think there would be anarchy on the roads if we were permitted to self-regulate? Or do you think the roads would be safer for all concerned?

We all know he broke the law but the argument is was he safe. We don't know that.

If you go from a 60 zone to a 30 zone does the safety factor change as soon as you cross the line....no

The law is the law...thats a given. but what is safe is not measured by the number on the sign post.

What is legal and what is safe are not always the same thing. And that works both ways.

_________________
Speed camera policy Kills

My original post was a response to Mr Chirpy's blatant troll.

I don't think anyone's arguing that laws should never be enforced.

He was convicted of speeding and that should be an end to it - 6 penalty points and £250 fine, or whatever.

If he was to be found guilty of dangerous driving it would have to be shown that his speeding was dangerous in the specific circumstances, which it wasn't in this case, which apparently was on a very high-standard rural dual carriageway.

_________________
"Show me someone who says that they have never exceeded a speed limit, and I'll show you a liar, or a menace." (Austin Williams - Director, Transport Research Group)

Any views expressed in this post are personal opinions and may not represent the views of Safe Speed

Yes, you are quite right. In fact people used to it on the A1 (of all places) to avoid a 4 mile round trip to the next junction from the Texaco station opposite Wittering village. And I never heard of anyone coming a cropper so it must be safe mustn't it? Hell no.
Similarly, I'll never support the idea that drivers should not be prosecuted for driving at speeds like 136 mph on the basis that they were doing it safely. Put this nugget of an idea in the minds of some of the nuggets on the roads that they can do it and not be prosecuted and I dread to think of what will ensue.
And folks, feel free to point out the German Autobahns, the experience and training of some drivers, the abilities of modern cars, or create imaginative scenarios, I'm not going to change my mind. And no, I don't have any precious evidence to support my fears.

Two points here - most traffic laws are reasonably absolute in a practical sense. The speed limit law is fundamentally different in as much as it's a matter of degree. 29.9999mph may be legal while 30.0001mph is illegal, but in all practical senses they are indistinguishable. With other offences you can't cross the legal line while other factors remain unaffected.

Roads are COMPLETELY self regulated. Passing or policing a law does not prevent a behaviour. It simply provides for punishment after the event. Road safety depends entirely on continuous self regulating behaviours - such as drivers adjusting their speed to the conditions. Driving is a dynamic interactive activity that cannot be predefined. Drivers must continuously recognise hazards and adjust to them.

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

Surely just going over the number on the lollipo mean he MUST have been dangerous?

Note heavy sarcasm

Yes there should be regulation, but sensible regulation thats not making criminals out of the best road users for a fast buck.