pogo wrote:
BW, you have my every sympathy for the injuries that you received from that juvenile nutcase, but by your comments you're making Paul's point for him! ... they need stopping and nicking, there and then ...
It's good to see that you have bounced back to your normal self, pogo! It was my mate who got had his hips smashed in - I got off light with a stoved in chest. Listen, I have absolutley no problem with having more coppers to stop and nick people as long as motorists can cough up the dough to pay thier wages.
Simply stated, four cases are
Code:
good quality driving at right speed = v low danger?
good quality driving at great speed = low-med danger?
poor quality driving at right speed = medium-high danger?
poor quality driving at great speed = v high danger?
Now we have argued for a zillion years about the gradations of meaning in that table, but speed and quality are both factors, and a programme of speed limits has been laid out to deal with that. Where the limits are wrong, they should be changed, and a process should exist to make that happen. But once set, it's our duty to propagate the programme, by deeds as well as words, and this site has not done that so far. I live in hope that things will change. Once motorists in general pay heed to speed limits when the matter, we can scrap mass enforcement all together. As long as they generally pay little heed, enforcement is practically inevitable, due to politics as much a technical reasons.