Safe Speed Forums

Like plaiting a particularly twisty, turny variety of fog, isn't it

_________________
"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

Surely in the event that the conditions are taken into account, you are in practise enforcing a "reasonable and prudent speed" rule - the maximum speed limit in practise doesn't exist, in the same way that in practise the christmas mince pie ban doesn't exist.

So should maximum speed limits exist in practise or not?

I think the balance was fair and beneficial in the 70s and 80s. We had speed limits. We knew what they were. They were enforced (largely) when beneficial to do so. No one was obsessed.

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

Old fashioned traffic policing , sensibly applied -

_________________
lets bring sanity back to speed limits.
Drivers are like donkeys -they respond best to a carrot, not a stick .Road safety experts are like Asses - best kept covered up ,or sat on

I don't know what you've got to grumble about now! I'm only trying to help with road safety. Being negligent does not require premeditation. The law sets out a pattern, and if your behavior falls into that, it is illegal behavior. In that case, it makes no odds whether you intended to do illegal behavior. And illegal behavior is illegal behavior whether you are caught or not.



Yes ... in that respect, slobby driving is like other petty, antisocial, mindless acts of stupidity like littering. Only its worse because lives are risked. You are simply wrong on this count, unless you are arguing that littering (to take another example) is quite legal if no-ones spots you!

_________________
I stole this .sig

Yeah, the past always looks better than it really was.

But it's wrong - in 1975 there were 12 million (!) fewer cars on the road, yet there were 6,366 deaths, almost twice the current number. So much for the 70s!



Just giving you the straight dope, PeterE. I know you don't like to hear it.

_________________
I stole this .sig

HMM- arguements against PeteE getting decidely foggy - ropey and full of unsmoked kippers ( red herring to you)

_________________
lets bring sanity back to speed limits.
Drivers are like donkeys -they respond best to a carrot, not a stick .Road safety experts are like Asses - best kept covered up ,or sat on

Interesting as that is, it doesn't really answer my question.

NDP - in the 60/70/80 there was a clearly defined limit of bad driving - associated with limit over reach.

There were sufficient trafpols to police /patrol and enforce - al la durham (today) style.

Drivers respected the trafpols as being trained to a very high standard , and capable of giving worthwhile advice, sometimes instead of a ticket ( more often in place of a ticket) - the trafpols earned their keep - enforcing/ educating and keepinfg law and order on british roads.


In the late 80/early 90 came along a new breed of trafpol - inspector , i think they were called - speed was the problem - didn't matter that too many vehicles were on a stretch of road ,with no safe distance between them - they started to target speeding during the day on roads that had a bad safety record at 5.00 at night - high traffic density / too close together - tough - they targeted them at 2.00 in the afternon.
From then on the rest , as they say is history.
CAMS/ HEGDEHOGS( talivans hidig behinfd hedges) till the establishment saw red and said "these are the rules" - problem is - the rules need a champion - drivers aint got one.

_________________
lets bring sanity back to speed limits.
Drivers are like donkeys -they respond best to a carrot, not a stick .Road safety experts are like Asses - best kept covered up ,or sat on

Interesting as that is, it doesn't answer my question......

Must , in all honesty ask - and also respectfully get honest answer - this question is asked without any preconditions etc or predujices -

are handy and B/W the same person??
orvare they in collusion, to perform same function???

_________________
lets bring sanity back to speed limits.
Drivers are like donkeys -they respond best to a carrot, not a stick .Road safety experts are like Asses - best kept covered up ,or sat on

I think there has to be "soft" limits but I said in another thread I believe these limits are enforced far too rigidly especially at the lower end where genuine blips can occur (30 and 40 mph especially, where I suspect most people are caught.)

If people are complying with the spirit of the law, and conditions and driver behaviour are appropriate for the speed, then I think enforcement is counter productive. I believe fixed cameras are a waste of time and hidden mobile enforcement taking into consideration the above criteria would be far more productive. I also think mobile enforcement should be extended to cover things in addition to speed, such as mobile phone use while driving.

An example of someone complying with the spirit of the law would be a driver at 35 mph in a 30 on a clear road while displaying good awareness of traffic around them and a good safety gap. This person does not need to be punished.

An example of a poor driver would be 33 mph while tailgating the car in front and talking on a mobile phone. This clearly needs punishment.

The rules as they are do not allow any of the above to take place. It is completely the reverse.

I answered with a fair example. The reason I chose an example is because there are endless degrees of 'fuzziness' in the concept of the question posed.

Rather than give reams of definitions I thought an example was more helpful.

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

Clearly you are trolling. Please put your wit to better use.

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

Yet another thread hijacked by Basingwerk.

I don't think there can be such a thing as a soft limit. A limit that is soft is NOT a limit.



Words you might be looking for are 'guidelines', or 'advice'.

_________________
I stole this .sig

Ok, then speed guidelines which are enforced but based on :

a) spirit of the law
b) level of danger

This is silly. Clearly you're telling us that speed limits cannot be called speed limits - because equally clearly they will never be perfect neither in enforcement nor in being observed.

We just have to haggle about the appropriate degrees and methods of softness.

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

The most important contribution you can make is to respect the rule of law, even when it is slightly inconvenient for you. Your defiance, even in defeat, does incalculable harm to the reputation of all motorists.

_________________
I stole this .sig

No need to confuse us with more BS. If you break the limit, you have broken the law.

The laws on drink, or tyre depth are not made soft just because people break them! Before you indulge yourself further by leading us up blind alleys, the law defines the limits, and it is up to us to obey them. All I’m asking you do is your duty – please be bothered enough to do that.

_________________
I stole this .sig