Safe Speed Forums

I was originally going to make that qualification - they're great at "soaps" and the like, but crap at Descartes. But then I thought "why spoil a quick quip..."

_________________
"Politicians are the same the world over... We build bridges where there aren't any rivers." - Nikita Kruschev

It's more than just speeding...

We're beset by deluges of increasingly ludicrous and inappropriate legislation that appears to attempt to micro-manage individuals' lives to an absurd degree - much of which carries disproportionate levels of penalty... A shopkeeper can be fined up to (IIRC) £5000 for selling a pound of spuds rather than 454g... Overstaying a parking meter by a minute or two can cost you a couple of hundred quid if the "snatch squad" are touting for trade... An ill-judged "homophobic" or "racist" remark can have the "Thought Police" down on you like a ton of bricks... All this pettifogging nonsense almost seems designed to encourage disrespect for the law.

_________________
"Politicians are the same the world over... We build bridges where there aren't any rivers." - Nikita Kruschev

Probably a bit late, but were not the first speed limits for the UK implemented in the Locomotive Act of 1861 which restricted traffic to 10mph (they were legislating for Steam Carriages on Roads), this was then changed to 4mph in the country and 2mph in towns in 1865, and introduced a requirement for a man with a Red Flag (or lantern at night).

In 1896 with automobiles on the roads vehicles less than 3 tons didn't need the red flag, and could go at 12mph. This was later raised until finally the Road Traffic Act 1930 abolished the then 20 mph speed limit and set a variety of limits for different classes of vehicle. There was no speed limit for vehicles carrying less than seven persons. The Act also introduced new requirements for driving licences and a licensing system for Public Service Vehicles.

http://www.dvla.gov.uk/histm_l/history.htm

Still thinking about the original question - the majority (from experience and observation) do not respect many speed limits, but still believe that they have purpose. If they were enforced with discretion and fairness, then I don't think that we would have a problem, but automated enforcement (and with respect to Cam Op - Talivans are effectively still just machines as the person in control is effectively working on a production line), has removed all possibility of discretion or consideration of the conditions. It is not speed limits that people disrespect, but the enforcement mechanism that has no credibility, and only the "respect" that is afforded to an overpowering bully holding a loaded shotgun.

I'll stand by "can't"; at least in the context of one-liners.

1st reason: I think the evidence of the number of people 'still speeding' - i.e. all of us - points to the fact that we really do not have the attention or the motivation required to live by the speeding laws. For all practical purposes, we ARE incapable.

2nd reason: If we did whatever was necessary to prevent speeding (ISA?) I believe that many more would die. So in a very literal sense we cannot live by the speeding laws. We have to live by skill and responsibility instead.

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

I thought I'd focus on the part I emboldened, otherwise we might redefine the term 'topic drift' and get lost in the maze.

Only a small percentage of us (humans) have the capability to make a truly informed decision on the basis of the evidence. I'm confident that Safe Speed's core supporters have done so, but to expect the same of the wider population is simply asking too much. Sadly.

Instead, we must promote and persuade working from the highest standards of accuracy and integrity. We'll attract people who are disaffected, of course, and frankly I don't see the harm. And even if I did, I don't see the alternative.

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

I’m not sure if I agree. I reckon I can abide by all speed limits at all times if I wanted to but it would mean a lot of dangerous speedo watching, many frustrated drivers behind me and, more importantly, I don’t believe doing so is conducive to safety (based on what I believed to be informed opinion) so I choose not to; so yes the motivation isn’t there. I believe most drivers are capable of abiding by that rule but at some level they choose not to (for reasons debated), or at least I hope drivers choose not to (as opposed to lack of care or attention )


I knew you were going to say that, hence my ‘……well…..’ clause

This is interesting. I agree that an individual 'can'. But I don't agree that a whole society can. Quite where or how it changes in the scaling up process I don't know (hence the interest).

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

Just got home from the most horrific commute home ever. Joined M3 southbound at 4:30, 20 mins later the engine ran at reduced power (not my car thankfully), then got stuck behind f***ing rubberneckers for 90 mins (car hit armco on northbound carriageway). Eventually got to Petersfield - the car started juddering, became noisy then lost all power (oh, the cambelt on it was changed last week...), got the rest of the way home in a rescue vehicle. I considered myself relatively fortunate when I saw the lifeless body under the white sheet on the A3 (now closed) at Clanfield. Apparently it was a large animal - I sure hope it was!
Back to the point.


One thing I have learnt in life is that individuals are generally quite smart, but as part of a group they can be surprisingly irrational. Speculating: perhaps it is the ill thought out actions of one individual being misinterpreted by the herd as a smart move, or more likely the 'well if they can do it so can I' mentality; the latter isn't necessarily a bad thing so long as the decision is an informed one.

Ach Liebchen - you raise so many points - ist hard to know where to start to make in-road into reply

Ist a longish post ..

I drive according to road conditions as prevail in any case und my first consideration ist to safety to those within my car und those immediately sharing road with me at the time. If they break rule und cause me a hazard to deal with - then ist to me to deal with it und diffuse - compensate for their error by weighing up und planning the right space und time to "correct" (if ist right word ) effectively und safely

Your post ist a bit like Reet's GCSE question which ist a bit like that old essay about it being right to take strike action to get workers' rights .. does the end justify the means?

We make choices .. to survive und improve our lot.. und sometimes we bend - even break rules to get there....

Votes for women.. union rights ..... all brought into existence by some civil disobedience on the part of a significant minority becoming more major.

I live in Leipzig for short time before Wall came down. ( It was work related und they did not storm the Wall to get away from my yadda yadda yadda either )

It was a collective und building resentment of draconian laws .... und a realisation that the West was not quite as described by the government of the day.

The majority were not wrong in that - but majority of "Ossi und Wessi" no longer convinced that re-unification bring the envisioned utopia either.

Lot of rebuilding still going on und whilst the streamlined economy ist leaner und meaner .. still the resentment that jobs und cheap rents no longer exist. So in some respects - "majority not quite accurate in belief that Western affluence magically appear - they not realise ist achieved by working for it.


Und you could say with road safety policy. Ist not achieved by just reducing a speed limit und whacking up a scammer to enforce.

Ist achieved by pain staking work in skill building, comprehensive education for all und road engineering which improve lot for all road users



It depend on whether a blip or a blat. Und just sometimes a speed below this lollipop can be criminally dangerous on a motorway - ist inconsiderate driving under I think s3 of RTA 1988 based on what IG say und what I hear on radio on the topic of the inconsiderate tractor driver



For some illnesses - it worked. Sadly - they applied to cure all illnesses. Isrt a bit like prrescribing a speed camera und reducing a limit to cure all illls.

My firm manufacture three of the leading cancer treatments. They do not suit all patients - despite media hype on one of them - und some other media stuff on how ist marketed.. to sell ...

If you like - ist a parallel with how society can be manipulated to believe... ist the nightmare politics which have become so sophisticated that the spin doctoring become out of control. (Another word came to mind there.. I change it but it sound even less English to me )







Ist part of problem - why we concerned over the blippers who do not notice the gradual on the gradient because of this... they even think they are legal too... "it feel 30 mph It does not feel 35 -40 mph."

This was said to Cousin Willi when he do recent IAM Observe so he tell us. (Willi posted to Cumbria as "willispeedifonlyhecould"



Nein - I do not think ist necessarily the pushy nature of the "hustlers" und "hurdlers"

Ted ist at top because he just worked his way up through his exams in most methodical manner .... und he has a nice manner with patients un staff as well - und I also get to higher playing field for same reason - worked at it fair und square without push und shove.

This type of work und legal/accountancy work require attention to details.

Aggression und over-confidence - this ist the anomaly I think.

We have the arrogance of youth.. arrogance of the chavs... sheer arrogant lawless und aggressive cheek of the thug who steal cars und has zero regard for his fellow human on the one hand.

On the other - the entrepreneur channel into creating mini-empires 0- but he also have this same disregard in way he bully his staff to reach this und that target.

Und perhaps these also allow this impatience und belief that time ist meaning money to overspill into drive. They do not switch from thinking about work to thinking und just enjoying the drive. Und not that easy to get them to a Yoga class either. Though I did get one such person to join a Yoga Class - I describe it as Power Yoga .. ist the version which go for the burning stretches. I did not tell him that he spend half hour learning to relax muscles in the same 90 minute class. He now hooked!

So again Riggers - perhaps way forward to try to reach ist to "sell in lingo they understand .. und this chap does now talk the Wildy way sometimes.. Ist my Marlene effect ..



I think perhaps people find they not like to wade in litter und dog poo so they make decision to keep things clean.

Same with speed .. we do not want to ride at the ton for miles und miles. People will vary their according to reason und circumstance. You see this occur in Germany - I do not think the average UK person ist that different as human being und secure feelings. Surprisingly few will sustain indefinite high speed - ist a variance between 80 mph und 120 mph on most A/bahn journeys (derestricts )



Tailgating ist really strange. Sometimes I wonder if person's perception of two second gap ist awry. I felt van too close to me tonight. I felt he stop too close at lights... but when I look in shop window reflection - ist tarmac/tyres .. he just looked closer in angle of central mirror.

It could be the sheer size of some of these giant vans/people carriers und 4x4 give impression of being closer in rear mirror because of their size. No research has been done und ist just seeing a reflection in shop window more than once which make me question my perception of the tail gate und in my case - I also have to ask myself if ist still fear because of what happen in my past.

So I have to honestly ask myself if my perception of being "tailgated"
ist accurate or just feeling they invade my space more than I feel comfortable given I allow three/four second gap.

Am not sure if this make sense .. ist me being subjective I think



Ist different. We can prove how drink affect body und mind - und ist not restricted to driving.



Because if we over eat .. get into debt.. smoke - we see the tangible und physical effects. We see a victim ..

If someone blip over a speed limit - usually without consequence.. or miss a sign on a recently reduced speed limit road... ist usually no incident.

Incident are caused if person fail to COAST or drive defective vehicle or simply fail to listen to their own body which tell them if it not well.



Or just drive like maniac because they steal car und are on high hyper as result - und they just do not care if anyone gets hurt as this type know no morality in any case. The adrenalin surge also act like drug to them as well.. a euphoric kick und in that state - human animal ist at most raw basic. Society can only show disapproval if they are caught (alive) und jail accordingly.




But we still have a subjugation of minorities. Most in UK are such creatures ....

We all slave to keep politicians in life of luxury

_________________
Nicht ganz im Lot!
Ich setze mich immer wieder in die Nesseln! Der Mad Doc ist mein Mann! Und ich benutzte seinen PC!

UND OUR SMILEYS? Smile ... und the the world smiles with you.
Smiley guy seen when you read
Fine me for Safe Speed
(& other good causes..)

Greatest love & Greatest Achievements Require Greatest Risk
But if you lose the driving plan - don't lose the COAST lesson.
Me?
Je ne regrette rien!

OK,

In this thread there is a general agreement that the simple act of breaking the speed limit by huge numbers of the general public is not wrong because:
Generally its safe to do so (agreed)
There is a wisdom in the actions of the masses that outweighs the 'illegality' of their actions (not sure)
The moral imbalance lies heavily towards the pernicious manner in which the law is being applied, there is no evidence that the ends justify the means. (agreed in principle)
Moral corrosion is more likely to spread out from the overzealous enforcement of laws that are considered trivial, than for the effect to be the other way around. (I don't necessarily agree with this).
Parallels drawn with other actions or behaviours are not generally applicable or have not been addressed.

Let me make this suggestion then.

Drivers who ignore the speed limit in roadworks where people are working are wrong, all of them.

Hogwash! You're assuming that the speed limit is correctly set. But if it's correct in the dry it's hardly likely to be correct in the wet. If it's correct for a Porsche it's hardly likely to be correct for an heavily loaded Transit. If it's correct for a learner, it's hardly likely to be correct for a Police class one. If it's correct in light traffic it's hardly likely to be correct in heavy traffic. Want me to go on?

And there's one frequent and highly necessary way that responsible drivers ignore the speed limit all over the country all day long - and that's when the speed limit is far too high for the circumstances.

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

I don't see why you're trying to be so particular. Surely it is sufficient to state that it is wrong to drive at any speed, whether under, at or above the speed limit, which endangers (or is apt to endanger) other people's lives or property.

The expression "endanger" is necessarily subjective and qualitative.

Not clear cut or simple - it does need to be clarified:

I will assume that we are not talking about a contraflow, or narrowed lanes, just where workmen are clearly visible at the side of the road or on the hard shoulder such as those working to install the new electronic signs on motorways.

Are they protected? Some will be behind very solid concrete barriers that are more effective than the central reservation armco, and the only real danger relating to a car is a vehicle leaving the protected area, and for vehicles in L3 the danger is minimal and the typical 50 or 40 mph limit is excessively low and unnecessary. Are the drivers in L3 wrong to go faster than 50?

Where workers have no protection other than a set of cones (or less) then there is a case for requiring lower speeds in the lanes closest to the work, but somehow this is not how it works in practice is it?

Real world example: M5 over the last 3 years as electronic signs were being installed. In general 3 sections of motorway had 50mph limits imposed on them where work was taking place; these sections moved along the motorway as work progressed, and were typically 2.5 miles long or more with no narrowing of lanes or contraflow. There were cones covering sections of the hard-shoulder, and at actual work sites (3 or 4 per 2.5 mile section) concrete barriers were erected between L1 and HS each 100yds long. So 1 mile of speed limit for each 100yds of work site that is well off the road and behind concrete barriers.

In driving up and down the motorway something like 200 times during the roadworks period the number of times anybody at all was spotted behind the protected areas was about 5% (generous estimate). The number of times workmen were spotted behind the coned areas was about 5%. By this I mean that you saw a single team at work once every couple of days down the entire stretch then it was a busy day, or conversely on half the journeys I didn't see anybody at all in any of the speed limited zones.

Now to the driver of the average car (not HGVs which are limited to 56 mph anyway) in L3 the risk that they pose to the workmen (when they are there at all) is minimal at whatever speed they are doing. So why have they been limited to 50mph? Are they wrong to speed when what workmen that are there are behind a barrier that is fully capable of stopping their car?

Don't forget that the M27 had identical works taking place without the imposition of speed limits at all, and that many motorways have sections where the HS is lost due to bridges built before the road was widened not having space for an HS. These are apparently totally safe with just a single sign saying "No Hard Shoulder for 100 yards" and no reduction in speed limit.

Unfortunately to compound the contempt that most drivers had for the limits, it was actually more common to see workmen doing initial preparatory work (such as digging the foundation holes) using a medium sized tracked digger sitting directly on the hard shoulder in the zones between the speed limits (i.e. normal 70 mph limit), with no warning signs, cones or barriers at all, than it was to see them within the speed limit zones!

While I know that my view was just a snapshot based on a single journey each way per day, that is also the view that the vast majority of other drivers would have also had. In this real world situation is it wrong to break the 50mph limit? How is it different to a 70mph DC that has no central reservation? Is it any wonder that the majority of regulars just slowed down to a token 70mph in the speed limits?

I think it's slightly wider than that.

I'd contend that moral corrosion sets in once people start to ignore increasing amounts of law that they see as "trivial"... Overzealous enforcement of those laws augments the corrosion by producing increased levels of resentment and by alienating the general populace from the law enforcers.

_________________
"Politicians are the same the world over... We build bridges where there aren't any rivers." - Nikita Kruschev

I'm assuming nothing, to present one of your comebacks, please don't underestimate me Paul. I believe that there are reasons for imposing a speed limit, particularly in roadworks which was why I was so particular, other than to allay the supposed danger.

I'm referring to the discomfort presented to the workforce by having vehicles passing nearby, discomfort that increases as vehicles speeds and hence windrush increases.
Unfortunately, tucked inside their vehicles most drivers seem determined to refuse to accept that passing by a group of workers at 40 mph makes life a lot more comfortable than when they pass them by at 70 mph. And if they do appreciate that, why the hell does it take a Specs camera system to force them down to 40 (or whatever)?
Secondly, I have no reason to believe that the presence or lack thereof of a workforce in and around the roadworks themselves would make one blind bit of difference. They could be there 24 hours a day and the limit would still be ignored, even though the signs often carry another notice indicating the reason the limit has been imposed.
Need I go on.

Are you saying that a car passing in L3 at 70mph creates more windrush, spray, discomfort and danger to the workforce on the hard shoulder than does a HGV passing in L1?

_________________
Only when ideology, prejudice and dogma are set aside does the truth emerge - Kepler

Oh come on Pete, you can do better than this! The speed limit has to applied evenly across the whole carriagway else the situation becomes too complex for many of the simple primates who are in those cars to understand.
And is it too much to ask for drivers to just do what is being requested of them when they're making their way through someones workplace?

DISCOMFORT? If there's 'discomfort' then tough - they should get an office job. Speed limits are worthy as a safety intervention if used with skill and care, but if anyone tried to endorse my driving licence for a 'discomfort' violation, I think I might explode.

If anyone wants speed limits for noise / discomfort / pollution / blah blah reasons then licence endorsements must be suspended in case of violation.

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

A shocking and horribly revealing sentiment, oh dear I fear we have reached an impasse



Again you make assumptions. Who said anything about endorsement of licences, I was merely exploring the rights and wrongs of ignoring speed limits in roadworks.
If we cannot do just that one little thing for the comfort (and its more than just a little discomfort if enough vehicles are ignoring the limit) of people who are working to improve the standard of our roads then all hope is lost

Then why do they not limit HGVs to much less, say 30mph, in roadworks? They present by far the biggest source of danger and discomfort, so why should they, in effect, not be limited at all? There's not much difference between 50mph and 56mph, is there? And lorry drivers are accustomed to differential speed limits anyway.



My father was a fireman, and if he had to put up with a similar level of discofort and danger in his workplace, he would have been a very happy man indeed.
And how often do you actually see them working? And as soon as there's a bit of rain or something, you don't see them for dust.
But we have the roadworks, and speed limits which extend for miles beyond the roadworks, in place for months on end, increasing the danger for all the millions of drivers using the road, and costing untold millions in lost time.

_________________
Only when ideology, prejudice and dogma are set aside does the truth emerge - Kepler