Safe Speed Forums

The easiest thing to do is obey the limit, then you can ignore the signs and relax, job done. You'd have to be a fool not to when you see a big yellow sign in the road saying SLOW DOWN OR YOU WILL PAY £100's OF POUNDS! I think of scameras as signs that are smart enough to empty my pockets if I disregard them.

_________________
I stole this .sig

That may stop you being hurt in the wallet department, but does very little in terms of actual safety. In fact, that attitude only creates more problems. The more we have "Speed Kills!" rammed down our throats, the more the idea that under limit = not dangerous will take root. You can see it happening already - people bumbling along at 29mph not paying the slightest attention to anything because they've fallen for the "speed is evil!" message. I'd rather take my chances with someone over a limit but paying attention than someone under a limit with their head in the clouds.

Serious question - have you tried driving EVERYWHERE never exceeding a limit? And I mean NEVER, not one mph over anywhere, including limit transitions, hills, anywhere? It's mentally draining and nigh on impossible, not to mention downright dangerous. Try going from a 70 to a 40 without being 1mph over the limit and see what chaos you cause behind you. It is much easier to drive along paying attention with a rough feel for the limit (which I believe is what most people actually do), but sadly in this day of +4mph prosecutions this is a financially precarious thing to do.

Do we really want to live in some kind of socialist wet dream where everyone takes the bus whever they go? Everyone except the politicians of course...some people are more equal than others. Kiss goodbye to the economy when everyone is forced to take public "transport" to work. The RMT will love that won't they...just think what sort of bargaining position that would put them in!

Until the unexpected happens then you have less time to react and more energy to destroy your life and others.


Here we go again. Who is saying dont concentrate on other things? I think nobody is suggesting this ae they. Just you and mr smith and a few of his other like minded disciples and speedsters.


I cant believe you said that"ALL"????

Sorry, but I'm nobody's "disciple". Where did I say "don't concentrate on other things"? The point is that you can apply your attention - or more specifically your visual focus - to one item at a time. If you are checking your speedo then at that instant you are NOT watching for hazards. The more we check our speedos the less able we are to spot hazards. It's that simple!

And if our speed was safe in the first place then this diversion is a total waste of our attention - there is no positive trade-off for the loss of attention. This makes the safe driver less safe.

I stand corrected. I did of course mean "the vast majority", not all. Sorry.

_________________
CSCP Latin for beginners...
Ticketo ergo sum : I scam therefore I am!

And again, here we have the same message. Nobody in the camera system or the police is saying this. JUST THE ANTI CAMERA BRIGADE.

What makes this a problem? Those that are trying to exceed the limit, thats who.Where? I havent seen them, how come loads of you have. In fact I cant remembe ever seeing someone doing this.


I think it would be unreasonable to expect anyone not to exceed the limit and this is allowed for.
Its a piece of pi*s to drive within the speed limits allowing for these tolerances. By the way +4mph only applies to teh 30mph limit. Try driving at or around the speed limits as a safe maximum. Its very relaxing and not at all like you describe. Perhaps you just cant drive.


Wipe your eyes, dry behind your ears and get on with it .

Thanks for the opportunity to open this up. If you cant glance at your speedo to maintain your speed without adding to your risk, you cannot be driving at a "safe speed".


No bother.

In theory that's fine, but more and more drivers aren't driving at a "safe" speed these days, merely at a legal one. As I said earlier it's not the expert drivers we need to be worrying about, but the ones who are more likely to be causing an accident in the first place. The last thing we should be doing is (a) telling them that obeying the speed limit is the No 1 priority, and (b) distracting them from the road ahead at times when their (legal) speed is possibly too high to start with.

_________________
CSCP Latin for beginners...
Ticketo ergo sum : I scam therefore I am!

Again I would say
(a) There is nothing I have seen that says this
(b) There is nothing I have see that encourages this and I know of nobody who has made this interpretation.

The only time I see this suggested is in discussions on anti camera sites and in the news media attributed to anti camera groups.

Where oh where are all of the people driving blindly at the speed limit regardless of conditions and risk.

They are all around you!

Remember that this is a game of incremental percentages. I am not saying that the advent of cameras has made everyone shift from being safe and attentive to being completely inattentive.

It is a few percent of lost concentration here and there, a few percent of drivers who spend a bit more of their time looking at speedos, wondering what the speed limit is and looking for cameras. If all of this has just shifted at about half a percent per year over the last ten years that would more or less fit the trend we've seen in fatalities.

But enough of that, what's your theory to explain the fact that our roads are getting steadily more dangerous as we get steadily more cameras?

_________________
CSCP Latin for beginners...
Ticketo ergo sum : I scam therefore I am!

Actually I can give you some really really frightening figures about deaths from blood viruses and related diseases. And I do not need government figures - can provide my own which I supply to the government! And the death rate in my field far exceed any sodding death on the sodding roads year on sodding year!!!!!!! And there is no way of God's planet that RTACs will exceed this!

Can also - if I so choose - really scare you all to death with numbers testing positive for illegal drugs and drink after they have been brought in dead following a RTAC! My cousin-in-law has made a couple of posts alerting browsers to absolute dangers in the Nonny Forim here!

Hope that make yous laugh - basingwerk - cos it certainly makes stomach churn - and I see this every b*****y day



Oh! So you agree that we target drunks and drugged - and people who are unfit through illness or fatigue?

How do we do it? Explain to me HOW a speed camera can do this! And explain to me HOW we get the "numpty" drive at 40mph regardless of what the sodding speed limit is - without trafpol and sole reliance on a flippin' machine!

And in any case - is periodic assessment not a good way to start? Get ADIs involved - would be better job provider that Noo Labia creations for mindless morons!

(Sorry - had bad day - lost two patients! And my stats still read like I am super duper doc!)

We need driver information adverts like we used to have - dipped headlights, two second rule, use of fog lights, parking in dangerous places, Green Cross, L3 is for overtaking only, and Clunk Click was far more effective and memorable than current one.

We need adverts demonstrating how ABS works - like the initial one which Ford brought out to advertise ABS on new Mondeo or whatever at the time. Too many do not know.

And of course we need to publicise good old COAST!




Suggest you read some of In Gear's posts on here! Especially everybody's on the "Driver Improvement Forum"

Speed is one issue of driving - and we are focusing on this one issue. If the others - all elements of COAST are addressed - a safe speed for road conditions is automatically chosen - and in urban areas and residential areas in particular - you find that driving whilst applying COAST ensures you choose the correct speed - which can be as low as 2mph! (per my GPS )

Come back and post here - what you understand by COAST - Clue - In Gear has defined it!




Where do you live gameboy? JT lives in Cumbria - like myself - and probably ventures into LanCASH£re as well - like myself!

They have zero tolerance up here - mate! Forget 10% +2 -- It don't exist!

RTACS are on increase because of it - Lancs has "Speed Course" for just over blips - and we are still hearing of daft NIPs despite much publicised announcement last month, , and a "Driver Improvement Course" (which they offer as alternative to fines and points for undue care.) They have over 300 fixed scams and goodness knows how many mobiles. They have just one plod at any one time patrolling 180 square miles of County!

You would expect RTAC rate to plummet - wouldn't you! Their own official figures shows increase - and we certainly know the A&E's around here are not seeing much in way of reductions. We are in fact seeing more medium/serious injuries at low speed impacts than previous and, without proper research and in depth study on our part, can only deduce that people are misjudging low speeds or taking undue risks in mistaken belief that "they will not get hurt!"

No - read PH - some very interesting ideas from the BiB there. I dare say you will be hearing from In Gear at some time!

BiB offer certain amount of discretion, words of advice and you know why you were in the wrong. (Have squeaky clean licence - by the way! And so has rest of this family - and we all know this because we are insured to drive each other's cars - so we would have to 'fess up to them!)

And there are signs - in some areas of the country - that message of drive dead on limit regardless of road condition is taking root. There also seems to be what we, in our family, call the "Pavlov Dog" effect - where people brake and speedo gawp at scam sites. That is not good for safety!

Inidentally - Lancs speed awareness course (and we know people who have attended this) focuses on hazard perception, choosing safe speed for road conditions and apparently does not harp on about speed! (Wife's reps have attended and so have half the nurses in LanCASH£re! (Those Nursy gals! ) This is how we know. One surgeon is still fighting his NIP at 34mph - on basis that he was rushing back to hospital to save a life at the time! (He will get the course if it fails - and that could mean someone's op gets postponed! )



Er - when they bumble along at this speed on a 40mph/ 50mph/NSL speed limit because they think it is a 30mph (and in Lancs - land of many 30mph dual carriageways enforced by scam and no KSI history whatsoever - it does happen! )

That is why it becomes a problem



You must be very inexperienced then. How many miles do you do p.a.?

You do see this in scam zone hot spot areas - and proof is in pudding from number of low impact crunches our A&E mob see!

You even get pedestrians crossing at a scam - because "motorists are supposed to slow down here!" Yup - that has been heard in one A&E department

The danger - gameboy - is that people do believe that they will not be killed if struck at 20 and 30mph. That is not so! People do indeed die from low impact collisions - and we appear to be seeing more of them. People misjudge the low speed - and take unnecessary risks .

It does not matter one jot whether you are travelling at 20mph or 120 mph - you have to drive applying COAST!



Not in LanCASH£re and the old geezer up before the beak for sticking two fingers at Steve C's talivan twits (daft we know - but ) was originally prosecuted for 44mph in a 40mph zone!

If you really believe it is allowed for - come up here and try driving around. If you still have a licence within one monthe thereafter - you will understand what we are on about!



If you believe this - my wife has just read this and is urging me to challenge you to come up here and drive around Lancs and Cumbria with your speedo covered "Feel the Speed!" - and see just how easy it is. Yoiu do not get 10% +2 at any speed in Lancs in particular - stern warning up to 35 and one Speed course - if they are applying their "slight" change of heart that is! . It is complete zero tolerance up here! Oh - and go along the A66 - lovely road - right little test of your knowledge of traffic law!

quote="gameboy"]

Wipe your eyes, dry behind your ears and get on with it .[/quote]

My wife lived in Moscow and Leipzig for a while back in late 80s. She sees nasty parallel with life there then and life here now. I visited her over there - and NOT NICE!

I would certainly not "wipe my eyes, dry behind my ears and get on with it" without a darned good fight!

Sometimes true, but far more often they make it a problem for themselves by maintaining 29mph no matter what. We're talking about the kind who chew our exhausts when we've slowed to 20ish on account of it pissing rain for example. Why do they do that? Because they want to do 30mph or whatever the limit is. Yes, in the pissing rain and other adverse conditions.
No one is saying that the police, DfT, scamera mobs etc have actually claimed that the limit is automatically safe. They usually use terms like "a limit, not a target", and few round here would disagree with that. Unfortunately the enforcement works the other way round, probably because it is so relaiant on camera and that's all they're capable of. The result is that a growing number of dedicated non-thinkers have interpreted it as limit = safe, >limit = dangerous. Your posts suggest that you don't believe that a limit is always safe anymore than the rest of us, but I personally know people who rigidly adhere to them no matter what. Needless to say I don't accept lifts.
Just because you haven't noticed them doesn't mean they're not there. Here, you weren't looking at your speedo at the time, were you?
It was allowed for, past tense. I had an e-mail exchange recently with Thames Valley, and they made it quite clear that in 30 zones they will ping you for 31. They do offer a driving course in lieu of a fine and points for the first time only, otherwise it seems to be the normal NIP. This isn't the case nationwide, but I expect it will spread.
True, but try driving round Thames Valley with that attitude and you'll get pinged before long. This is what we mean when we talk about giving drivers the wrong message. Thames Valley are basically saying that 31 is automatically dangerous. Not out loud or in print, of course, but actions speak louder than words and their actions are to chuck everyone they catch at 31+ onto a course, or fine 'em if they'd been before (ie within the previous 3 years IIRC). So the assumption is that if 31 is automatically dangerous, then 30 is safe. Big assumption, quite wrong, but people are thinking that way. You may not believe it, but you might change your mind if ever some inattentive berk doing 29mph parks it in your boot because you'd reduced speed to take account of conditions.

Anyway, this is all by the by, as excessive speed accidents are rare, and maybe as much as 2/3 of those occur within the speed limit (and are therefore camera-proof). The other 87% are almost all down to drivers making non-speed related mistakes, and I'd include mechanical failure as a driver error if it's as a result of poor maintenance. But while the focus of road safety is so heavily weighted towards whether a car is over or under the limit, 87% of the problem is being dealt with inadequately. That's assuming the govenment's 13% speed figure is actually right.

I'm sure you've heard this before, but cameras can't deal with bad overtakes, drunk and/or stoned drivers, stolen cars (who don't give a stuff if they get pinged), spectacle wearers who've forgotten their bins, people too tired to be driving, dangerous right turns (ie should have waited), people on a prescription medicine that affects driving ability, inattentive drivers, drivers like my late uncle who carried on for years even though he had Parkinson's because his GP was too spineless to order him off the road (he never took a driving test either btw - double ), unroadworthy cars, foreign owned cars, the list goes on and on. Cameras cannot do anything about these, but there is something that can. A trained traffic plod. What a shame there's only about half as many as there were ten years ago. We never had enough, and the idiots in charge have actually cut their numbers as they've relied more and more on cameras. We don't just need the numbers we used to have, we need far more. Sure, they'll tell us money is a problem, but Hell's bells, we pay enough council and motoring taxes to afford a few more BiB. But it'll help pay for it if every camera gets turned into razor blades.

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

Nope - take a peek at "Chief Constable Speaks Out" on the "news" forum here.

And before you start ranting - the County has safest record in the country

Oh for crying out loud....I DO try to drive around using the limit as a maximum, stop assuming that everyone with an anti-camera opinion is some sort of mad speeder. I see dangerous sub-limit driving all the time - people sat at 40mph in the right hand lane of an NSL dual carriageway who simply DO NOT SEE anyone behind them trying to overtake perfectly legally at nearly twice the speed. What happens? You're forced to undertake, then get the flash treatment, even though you've been forced into an illegal move by their complete ignorance of "keep left unless overtaking". This sort of behaviour is increasingly evident on DCs and motorways, often completely empty! Surely that constitutes due care and attention? Ah, you need traffic police to enforce that.

I DO see people every day driving along at a fixed 29mph through town, regardless of hazards or conditions. People driving round and not paying attention is a problem regardless of the speed they're doing. Which would you prefer? Someone paying attention and aware of their surroundings but who has crept over a limit by a few mph (kerching!) or someone with their head in the clouds sitting bang on the limit without a clue as to events outside their car? Who will have more reaction time? How can you react if you haven't even SEEN the hazard? These people ARE swallowing the below limit = safe spin yet they are MORE of a danger than people who have nudged over by a few mph. The focus solely on speed is insanely blinkered.

We have a forest of cameras yet fatalities have RISEN, there are serious flaws with SCP KSI claims and even the methods used to gather the data to start with (read the Stone Report) and we have people like Brunstrom and self appointed "experts" like David Begg dictating traffic policy. You can steal a car and get a warning, yet dare to actually own and drive one and you're guilty until proven otherwise. Zero tolerance is being applied to all the wrong areas. People are losing respect for the police. That is dangerous.

Please leave the "maybe you can't drive" insults back in the playground where they belong. Either debate sensibly or go and bother someone else.

But would you rather take your chances with someone who is paying attention and driving within the limits?



I try to drive within the limits at all time so I don’t have to worry about cameras and cops. I’m surprised you ask - the trick is to take your foot off the pedal now and again. I’m don’t want to be a sucker, subsidising everybody else with my money from fines and higher insurance. If I went about exceeding the limits here and there, they would get me, so I’ve wised up before I get pinged. This is the crucial point – before, I could get away with exceeding limits quite routinely. Everybody was at it. This went on for years - driving along with only a rough feel for the limit. As you say, now +4mph prosecutions make this expensive, and there is more monitoring on the way, including high throughput screening, where they will snap me when I join the motorway, and when I leave it, and if the time is too short for the distance, PING!



I don’t know why you mention busses – I’d take them if it made sense. Like everybody else, I want to get from A to B in a timely, cost effective and convenient manner without killing anyone, being killed and without ruining the planet.

_________________
I stole this .sig

[quote="JT"]The more we check our speedos the less able we are to spot hazards. It's that simple![quote]

It's ridiculous in this day and age that you have to look at your speedo to tell you are over the limit. The car should beep or something when you are risking it. Nobody could go around 'thumb in bum, mind in neutral' then. All it needs is a miniscule transmitter on the road signs and a tiny receiver linked up to the speedo on the cars. What's the matter with these road engineers? They don't have the vision to engineer their way out of a paper bag.

_________________
I stole this .sig

But what you don't seem to realise is that the motivation of many contributors to this forum is not that we personally feel that our licences and livelihoods are under severe threat, but that we believe that the current "one-club golfer" approach to road safety policy is actually making the roads more dangerous. If the annual fatality figures were 2,700 and falling, then we wouldn't have a leg to stand on - but they're not, they're 3,500 and rising. This disproportionate attitude to speed allows people to get away with and justify all kinds of unsafe behaviour on the roads, so long as they stay within the speed limits. The fact that you can obtain convictions for a particular offence does not necessarily mean that you are justified in doing so if it serves no wider benefit.


I agree - but current policies are not delivering this.

_________________
"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

Good point - the solution is to abolish lane priorities, as they have in LA. Everybody drives along at (more or less) the same speed, nobody has priority over anybody else, and there are fewer inappropriate lane changes. A good bit of undertaking takes place, which you enjoy by the looks of it, but its not a problem because everybody stays in lane anyway. They also do this because it maximises the bandwidth of the road, which is important in LA.

_________________
I stole this .sig

I think you'll find that the engineers haven't bothered doing all this because they realised its true significance and have been concentrating on more worthwhile safety improvements.

But it does look like there's a strong political will to impose some sort of mechanised speed limit control over the coming years. So all the clever engineers will no doubt be diverting all their attention to this road safety sideline, so cue another hike in fatalities while they are not working on things that deliver real improvements.

_________________
CSCP Latin for beginners...
Ticketo ergo sum : I scam therefore I am!