Safe Speed Forums

There are a fair few limits nr me which use to be NSL 60's and now are 40's ...... the raod was fine at NSL and so before you could do 60 or 70 with no problems, not a built up area, good visability etc and be almost double the limit for the same strethc of road where before you would not have got stopped.

Having stupit out of place limits will make you disregard the limits which really are right. But then again you should be able to drive with no limits but to the stopping distance you can see to be clear. Thats never going to happen here, so speed limit arre to stay.

Similar to men at work road signs, often there is nothing, even the traffic light warning signs, there is not traffic lights or they have been turned off. In the end you ignor the signs as many are not relevant. Its the same with speed limit signs now.

You have to be a twit to do 44 in the 30, so don't be polite. If you mean twit, use twit, not tw*t.

_________________
I stole this .sig

Even if it was a 60 last week?

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

PeterE could have choosen this other picture of the same stretch of road, which shows, in the left bottom corner, the start of pedestrian crossing markings, as described here. One might conjecture that this would have underminded his case for a higher limit, though. What do you say, PeterE?

_________________
I stole this .sig

Yes, there's a pedestrian crossing there. But there are plenty of pedestrian crossings in limits higher than 30, for example three or four miles further north on the same road, in a more built-up area. Also why does a pedestrian crossing require the limit to start at least 300 yards earlier, where it is ignored by virtually all drivers?

_________________
"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

Of course, if the lollipop was up to date.



Any damage to police vehicle will add to your (and, more importantly, my) tax bill. Any help you withhold will reduce their effectiveness and add to our tax bill too. In any case, your trangression is not a personal thing to the coppers - you are an incident number, so don't go after revenge. It's only a piddly little event in your life that means next to nothing. You should toughen yourself up, because (in your current state) if you ever get a real problem, instead of this child's play, you would be stuffed. No wonder the Australians call Brits the whinging poms!

_________________
I stole this .sig

We can argue all we like (and do so emphatically) that it is wrong to enforce speed limits so vigorously, but in the current climate, anyone exceeding the limit by any amount is asking for trouble - 14mph is plain daft.
The bit I can't understand is the 'going to work' bit in the original post. People dont set out to have a crash, they happen on the way to work, the cinema, the football match, to see the loved one etc etc. Ordinary people going about their routine when...whammo. Inattention, speed, conditions, etc etc combine to turn that ordinary, familiar run all pooey.

If the new LOWER limits are so good how come so many little "shrines" have popped up on them. In Leeds a number of roads have suddenley had lower limits posted and "Scamera" signs installed. These are where most of these "Shrines" are now. I don't see any reasoning behind them except to fill up Philips coffers!

_________________
Life in the Air Age isn't all the Brochures Say...

Sorry, but most of your comments are insane!

If you really believe that exceeding a lolipop that was 10mph higher not long ago, in clear visibilty with no hazards present on a bike that will do 75 in first, is tantamount to stupidity and dangerous, then this country and the TWITS that run and enforce it have lost the plot.

If going at 44 really does put me close to the edge in danger terms then god only knows how they let anyone out on the roads. Its a bloody number on a disk, and has very little to do with safety.

Why the hell does the number 44 suddenly make people quake in their boots? The whole nation is being brainwashed. Perhaps you should try using the roads round our way (Suffolk), where we can barely get above 40 on the main roads !

To be insulted by way of comments that I and others would be safer if I lost my licence is an insult to me and common sense. On a bike I see death in the face most days on the road, and nothing to do with my riding; It's my road use that helps me avoid all the fuckin twats that would wipe me out.

This whole 'speed kills' and exceeding the limit is deadly is taking the piss. It flies in the face of common sense and the stats prove its doing buger all to save lives. Going slow (or not being able to go fast) doesnt make you a safeer road user, on the cotrary, its the twats that cant use safe speed that should lose their licence.
I've been safely using the roads for 22 years now and only now is my licence at risk, because the limits are ridiculous.

What we need is civil disobedience to sort this out, as no ballot box is going to do it.

Me 'Think again'! I think not. I know how to drive and ride on the roads. Nanny state? I dont even think it begins to explain the state of our road enforcement.

Now Im having a very bad day

If you are referring to my comment read it again. I didn't say it was dangerous, but exceeding the speed limit by 14mph (regardless of what it was last week, the month before or will be next week) is just daft nonetheless.
Why?
Because the authorities have the mandate to stick up cameras and sit at the roadside in their little vans, take nice piccies of you breaking the limit on the lollipop, fine you and endorse your driving licence that's why
But if you want to carry on full in the knowledge that you could lose your licence, fine by me. Its no good muttering to yourself that you were being perfectly safe as you leave the magistrates court and head for the bus station on your fourth strike is it? And you can throw as much invective around as you like, unless the powers that be finally see sense, we're stuck with it.

Yes Rigpig, I do understand what you mean, but its the implication that road user slike me really ARE athe menace on the roads that the scamera partnerships and the like make us out to be.

Getting caught these days is not as hard as it used to be, and I reckon we will all have points before long.

As for my doing 44 in a 30, this road isnt your run of the mill 30 in a built up area, but a clear open road between fields leaving town. The local authorities simple have a mandate to break all reasonable common sense in the pursuit of money.

There are now loads of inappropriate 30s like that where speeds of 40-45 aren't in any meaningful sense dangerous, and where most traffic (except the people recently stung by Talivans) does that kind of speed.

In the example I posted earlier in the thread, I would say over half of traffic exceeds 50 in a 30. No doubt a Talivan could make rich pickings - fortunately there's nowhere to park one

I was talking to an IAM observer who said he deliberately avoided taking associates along that stretch, as he couldn't in any conscience expect them to stick to that particular limit, and braking firmly for it could provoke road rage.

_________________
"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

A fool and his money are easily parted.

_________________
I stole this .sig