Safe Speed Forums

You have the better of me, r11co - well done! Since speed cameras DO inform what the speed limit was, the answer is ‘since the start’. But does that help at all?



Thanks for being so open and honest. Have you taken the pledge yet, or do you still zoom around when the will takes you?

_________________
I stole this .sig

My answer to that is completely irrelevant. However, I'll give you an opportunity in the light of your meaningless and simplistic pledge to have another go at this one...

Blimey. Did it hurt when they fitted the electrodes?

Or are are you bound by contract?

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

We are bound by law, SafeSpeed.

_________________
I stole this .sig

What? Bound by law to spout dogma on Internet forums? I didn't know things had got so bad. I thought we still had a right of free speech.

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

Thanks for this opportunity...



I acknowledge that you have indeed pointed something out several times, but it would be wrong of me not to oppose those who condone (and participate in and encourage others to do) acts of speeding.



It seems more likely that those who condone, participate in and encourage others to do acts of speeding are to blame for road deaths. I just obey the law. You should try it sometimes – speed really is the enemy of calm driving.



I've certainly acknowledged it, so now you can consider it addressed.



I know you mean well, but actions speak louder than words. Keep your speed down.

_________________
I stole this .sig

What "dogma"? It is not dogma to stay within the speed limits! It is not dogma to ask others to drive calmly and within the speed limits! It is not dogma to identify and warn people who don't stay within the speed limits!

_________________
I stole this .sig

Fallacy. Ignorant fallacy. Even at the peak of their statistical manipulations the DfT could only pin excessive speed as the cause of a minority of accidents (33% - the 'one third lie' that they have since gone on record to say was too high a figure). How self righteous yet utterly wrong can you be, BW?? This isn't dogma - it's garbage.

To repeat, you seem to have an obsession with the law yet little understanding of the purpose of the law, except insofar as a propensity for control freakery.

To repeat something from another thread, the law as it is framed and enforced at the moment 'mugs' safe motorists. I feel that is wrong and I see nothing wrong in campaigning to have that situation changed. I see plenty wrong with supporting (as you do) a policy which claims to improve road safety yet presides over an increase in road fatalities, irrespective of the law.

This is very different from advocating breaking the law, but you seem to want to mix the two. You have no evidence that I or anyone in here who supports my viewpoint is a law breaker, and your silly pledge is nothing more than an attempt to create an insinuation of that evidence.

Bottom line - you are supporting a failing policy irrespective of your (false) arguments. You and the policy are wrong.

'Speed kills' dogma of course, and all the crap that comes with it and results from it.

We need much more grown up road safety policies.

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

ermm.. doesnt safety come into this somewhere?
or are you not worried about that... so long as it's in the limit and 'calm' we're all happy?

That's the big problem with Basingwerk. He's too busy points scoring that he forgets the main issue.

and what is the score at the moment?
or is that subjective

back to my ignored comment... i thought repeaters were required (i.e. by law?) for any limit excet 30 or NSL .... ?

Wasn't ignored by me... Yes, AFAIK they are required, but that doesn't mean they're always present - the typical standards of maintenance means some repeaters have fallen off, or been removed and not replaced in the process of maintenance on the post to which they were attached, or are still present but are badly faded/peeling/covered in grime/obscured by vegetation such that they're unreadable.

Now, in principle, this should then mean that the limit is unenforceable, but since when has that stopped the scamerati from having a go anyway?

Yes, but I - and a lot of others here - can show you examples of 30mph roads which, going by their character, surroundings and traffic, you'd swear blind were NSL.

Don't make the mistake of assuming you can always tell the difference.

Cheers
Peter

But it's still hard to tell the difference between 30s and NSLs. There are a couple of roads near here with no streetlights for miles, which are obviously not 30. Then out of the blue you pass a pair of NSL signs which on the reverse purport to show you have just left a 30 zone.

I doubt they are camera routes as I don't think it would stand up in court, but it's still BS and very confusing.

thanks. i'm sure anomolies exist but proportionate to the number of miles we collectively drive each week they must be pretty small.

..which is no consolation to those who have lost their licences due to these anomolies.

Cheers
Peter

Good point well made, exacerbated also by a deliberate policy of obfuscation...



Road users are supposed then to realise that they are in a 30mph speed limit when there is a system of street lighting - even during daylight. I suppse then that they are now expected to to note the presence of porch lamps or security lights or even floodlights on adjoining park sports fields and try to assess whether they will illuminate the roads when switched on.

Sorry ed_m, but the idea that we are just supposed to 'know' the speed limit is too much of a gamble when 'laws' involving speed limits being tied to the presence of street lights is open to blatant perversion by the Basingwerk permitted law-abusers of this land. A clear and unambiguous system of speed limit signing would be the only way to back up with utmost integrity the current policy.

Funny how it seems the policy makers want to go in the other direction though! To use an example already alluded to by the BW himself - we'll leave you in doubt as to the speed limit, hope you break it and then send you a bill for £60 and a reminder of what the law is after we think we have caught you.

Ching ching!

_____________________________________________________________

OTR is the newsletter of ABD

Sorry to copy this entire post but I became so amused by it that I thought I might share....

Imagine we are in "2001 A Space Odyssey" and BW is Hal. Now, re-read the post applying Hal’s voice to BW.

_________________
Ross

Yes I'm a hoon, but only on the track!!!!

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