Safe Speed Forums

I am sad to hear that the police act on malicious complaints from people behind law abiding drivers. 18 in the 20 is NOT slow. I hope (but somehow doubt) that it is SOP to take the originator’s details, so that they can be bollocked for their time-wasting stupidity, and fined for using a mobile phone from their car!

_________________
I stole this .sig

Oh yes it is. (if it's clear) Especially if the road in question was previously NSL.



What if it was a passenger?
If I saw someone driving unnaturally slowly, I'd also be inclined to report them - just in case they are drunk - before they kill themselves or someone else.

Thanks for the friendly observation, RigPig.

I don't suppose 18MPH is that slow, really. Quite quick actually for the bloke who'll be doing the warning flag waving in front of the oncoming car where legislation, apparently, is to return, eh?

Just proves a point -
A trafpol on the road is worth more than two vans in the bush

It depends if there is room for cyclists to pass you. If not, you would be causing a tailback.

The explanation for the manner of driving was from Mark. I was detailed to stop a driver who in the eye of another motorist was driving in a way which caused him to suspect that something might be wrong. The fact of the matter is that virtually no-one drives at 20 mph through the 20mph zone in Ambleside, unless there is reason to do so (cyclist, horse and cart etc). It is not an appropriate speed for the road in the majority of circumstances. The south end of the 20mph limit used to be NSL, and the mile+ after that has been reduced from NSL to 30mph. It is not a residential area, and the 30 limit (with repeaters) is an attempt to protect the motorist from a series of bends. I don't think it works, we still get accidents through the bends .

Driving under the limit in will be seen as unusual in this location, and the consequences were that a tailback occurred.

So I'd rather someone directed me to look at driving that was, in their experience, out of the ordinary. That type of call is much more likely to result in a driver being dealt with for DUI or unlicenced.

I'd be loathe to criticise the informant, and since when was it an offence to use a mobile phone in a car? .

_________________
Fixed ideas are like cramp, for instance in the foot, yet the best remedy is to step on them.

Ian

So, what is the motorist with 9 points to do?

On the one hand, driving within the speed limit is regarded as "unusual" and may well result in being stopped on suspicion of DUI or being unlicensed, and on the other hand, exceeding the speed limit not only threatens the driver with a ban through totting up, but also makes him guilty of a "serious criminal offence".

I would say that driving at the limit in circumstances where the 85th percentile limit is higher than that would not raise too many eyebrows. Driving 10% or so below the limit where the 85th percentile speed may be 50% higher than the posted limit is going to be seen as unusual. That was the case in this scenario.

_________________
Fixed ideas are like cramp, for instance in the foot, yet the best remedy is to step on them.

Ian

Well for the benefit of those of you who have not seen the part which is limited to 20 mph, here is the view towards Ambleside (where Mark was coming from). In the distance are a set of traffic lights, with the left fork taking you through an extended length of 20 mph, or the right (straight on) road extending the limit some 150 yards.

The site has featured in the national press some time after it was introduced, and is widely regarded as utterly stupid by everyone apart from T2000 and SUSTRANS. No doubt somebody within the County Council had sympathies with those groups - we can only hope they take early retirement.

In the Windermere (opposite) direction, the limit becomes 30 for one mile. The stated purpose (CCC) is to protect cyclists from being exposed to fast moving traffic, as the footpath is not wide enough to be shared as is the case elsewhere on the road, and the Lake prevents it from being widened.
A planning application for a path on piles driven into the lake bed was recently turned down on the grounds that no proper plans accompanied the application!! Words cannot convey what I think of a local authority which fails to provide proper plans with a planning application. Suffice to say our council tax is being used to pay these incompetant morons!!

Dont worry about the overgrown limit sign - I reported it, and 6 or 7 weeks later, they cut back the brush (but did'nt restore the road signs and marker posts to their former glory!)

_________________
Time to take responsibility for our actions.. and don't be afraid of speaking out!

If he or she can afford it - a Road Angel or similar LEGAL gadget may be a useful investment

You could place a sticker in back window - have seen "Nine Points - Please Pass" when on hols in Wales!

Failing that - use COAST and observe lollipops and drive 3 mph below the lollipop speed - which means you stay 10% +/- as general observation (and based on testing my wife on a track day.and being a pain in the passenger seat by asking awkward questions at thewrong time )

_________________
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.

Can you see the irony of it? One is likely to evade being stopped for drinking if one breaks the speed limit as well!

Is this a joke? I don't call this forum 'Topsey Turvey Land' for nothing!

_________________
I stole this .sig

That's precisely the sort of lunacy that we're fighting against here - what the hell were you thinking?

I tried all the variations, but when I entered www.topseyturveyland I got "page not found". Give us the full url Basingwerk, 'cause I cant get here by using that!

It's not driving fast which would see you avoid getting pulled for DUI, it's driving with confidence, and safely which would see you OK.

_________________
Time to take responsibility for our actions.. and don't be afraid of speaking out!

I'm not surprised. I don't think anyone does.

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

It is in fact policing the real world. We have to take into account people's expected behaviour. The important road safety issues depend on it.

Topsey Turveydom can be found in spades on this thread.

_________________
Fixed ideas are like cramp, for instance in the foot, yet the best remedy is to step on them.

Ian

Im afraid the "powers that be" cant have it both ways.

On one hand an effective zero tolerance speeding regime is operating in many counties.

On the other we are "expected" to ignore 20 mph limits.

10%+2 in a 20 is only 24 mph very difficult to stay below.

You either return to the old method of common sense speed enforcement based as Ian says on 85th percentile speed.

or

You have to accept that breaking the 20mph limit is unacceptable and in order to drill that into peoples heads have strict enforcement of the limit.

BUT under the current speed regime I dont see how you can say you should go over 20mph!!!! (although I almost certainly would if I didnt have points on my licence)

Pity the guys at the front line like Ian arent setting road traffic policy.

There is no one that hates crawling along at 18/19mph more than me. However in unfamiliar areas I have no way of knowing there isnt a mobile trap round the next bend.

If I knew the speed enforcement regime was common sense based on 85th percentile speeds I would have no problem travelling at 24/25 in such zones. However at present I have no such confidence

As regards camera detectors I believe the Government is soon to make them illegal.

_________________
Mark

Hmm.. the police let lawbreakers pass, but stop people just for obeying the law. IanH, can you confirm that your policy is to verbally advise such drivers to break the law in future?

And we've got a "Road Safety" group who want people to be able to drive as fast as they like.

None can see any irony, and all deny that it's topsey turvey. To cap it all, they tell me how serious they are!

_________________
I stole this .sig

Not for the want of trying though, got to give them credit for that

No basingwerk, the partnerships let speeding drivers pass and in effect don't lift a finger until/unless a NIP goes through the driver's letter box. The police do stop drivers. "For obeying the law"? No again. Have you forgotten that Mark101 was stopped because somone else wrongly thought he might have been either drunk or wasted? There was a suspicion that he was not obeying the law, which of course turned out otherwise.


I'm sure we'd all like you to point us at the part of the Safe Speed site or the forum thread that says this. It's not about people being allowed to drive as fast as they like. It's about making drivers responsible for setting a safe speed, training them how to do it properly, and then allowing them to get on with doing just that without pinging them every time an arbitrary limit turns out to be lower than is necessary to remain safe.

You twist and turn like a twisty turny thing, basingadder . Stop trying to twist this to make out that we want a free for all on the roads. It couldn't be much further from the truth.

_________________
Make everything as simple as possible, but not simpler - Einstein