States Getting Deperate

[1888]

We need more obedient little state servants like you.

so to drive in a safe and sensible manner having consideration for others

is akin to giving Cameron a BJ ?

maybe when your old enough to drive you will have matured a little

[Injin]

Is removing anxieties with legislation a good idea?

[HPC001]

so to drive in a safe and sensible manner having consideration for others

is akin to giving Cameron a BJ ?

maybe when your old enough to drive you will have matured a little

Driving in a safe manner =! obeying an arbitrary speed limit that may or may not be correct for the road and conditions.

Do you really think punitive fines are the best way to get people to cooperate? Time for a more sensible, less authoritarian approach perhaps?

[billfunk]

Driving in a safe manner =! obeying an arbitrary speed limit that may or may not be correct for the road and conditions.

Do you really think punitive fines are the best way to get people to cooperate? Time for a more sensible, less authoritarian approach perhaps?

Come now - don't let rationalism get in the way of self-righteousness.

[The Masked Tulip]

I read somewhere that speed cameras in the USA were useless, as in the US Constitution, any defendant has the right to face his accuser... and well, it's kinda tricky getting the things into the court, then getting them to talk...

Different matter if it's a cop with a radar gun, but a GATSO - useless over there

Please someone, tell me it's true!

I know that in Boston you don't have to pay the fines - they have cameras on the toll bridges and people just drive through, apparently they send you a fine and you don't have to pay due to something to do with what you mention.

It does not stop the cabbies in Boston asking you for 25 cents when you go over a toll bridge though - if you are ever in that situation watch what happens to the 25 cents after you hand it to the cabbie. Does it go anywhere near the toll bucket?

[Realistbear]

Perhaps they should invest in some speed cameras they are quite good at generating revenue or would the yanks just shoot them up with armour piecing bullets?

They appear to be in the death throws.

Not long now before the end I am afraid:

http://uk.finance.yahoo.com/news/ben-bernanke-all-but-rules-out-double-dip-tele-546635d6eadf.html?x=0

We can now look forward to a new superpower rising up but it won't be the Soviets and the Chinese keep themselves and their borders to themselves so it may be Islam? They have grabbed all the oil and Iran is leading the way with Nukes, they already have significant groups living throughout the EU (France especially) so they may be the natural new world superpower? At least Sharia law and a stricter moral code will make a change from what we have become accustomed to since US hegemony.

[Guest sillybear2]

Operation ponzi, steal and public pension.

[Oliver Sutton]

Very few accidents are caused by excessive speed (about 6% nationally, rising to 9% on rural roads) don't believe the propaganda about "33%" that's just billox

The vast majority of accidents are caused by poor driving.

But accidents at higher speed, for whatever reason, do a lot more damage.

[Injin]

But accidents at higher speed, for whatever reason, do a lot more damage.

Yes they do, and one could take that into account when passing judgement on those cases without attacking everyone who doesn't crash or drive badly.

i.e. it's not beyond the bounds of possibility to have a justice system that only works from facts.

[Guest sillybear2]

But accidents at higher speed, for whatever reason, do a lot more damage.

That's why cars are fitted with metal discs in order to reduce velocity, if you have a 40mph road very few accidents occur at that speed because people engage these magical devices.

[tricksters]

+1

I would also make anyone who loses there licence

take a block of driving lessons and make them sit

their test again

driving is not a right

Its tossers like Clarkson who think its cool to do

100mph+ on a PUBLIC road

its not its just fekkin dangerous

100 mph on public road dangerous? You don't say!! Most people disapprove of dangerous driving, so how about coming off your high horse? It's the sanctimonious, self righteous, goody two shoes tone that many will find a tad irritating. And the repeated references to "lawbreakers" deserves the "obedient little state servant" jibe.

You don't hold exclusive rights to disapproval of dangerous driving so kindly wind your neck in.

[Guest sillybear2]

100 mph on public road dangerous? You don't say!!

I dunno, I bet 100mph in a modern car on a clear motorway is relatively safer than bating along at 50mph in a Ford Anglia on some dodgy A road in the 1950's, some cars used to rely on cable brakes! Not that I advocate blasting past your local school at a ton before all you do gooders get on to me.

It's not just about speed alone, it's when you also add in factors like being pi$$ed, drugged, tired, unalert to road conditions, unlicenced, uninsured or driving a car that hasn't passed an MOT in this millennia; then it becomes fatal.

[Oliver Sutton]

That's why cars are fitted with metal discs in order to reduce velocity, if you have a 40mph road very few accidents occur at that speed because people engage these magical devices.

Not sure what point you are trying to make.

[Guest sillybear2]

Not sure what point you are trying to make.

Ok, so hitting people at 30mph is bad, but hitting people at 40mph is much badder, m'kay, ergo 40 should be cut to 30, but how many accidents actually occur at those speeds, people generally brake when they see a problem before them, so impact speeds in urban areas are generally only a fraction of the limit. Lots of spurious stats assume people travel at the limit and just hit things without even trying to avoid trouble.

[southmartin]

100 mph on a clear motorway is very safe, however 25 past the school gates at 3pm is reckless.. yet guess which one is illegal?

That's the problem with focussing on speed instead of driver ability and road conditions. An arbitary limit always has to play to the lowest quality of driver out there.

For those people advocating speed limits, let me ask you this: Would you rather be a passenger in:

• a 20 year old lada driven at 59mph down a derestricted country lane by a pensioner with barely legal eyesight in a thunderstorm, or

• 71 mph in a ferrari driven by michael Schumacher on a clear motorway on sunny day

One is legal, the other isn't.

Speed limits are nonsense, the law should concentrate on driver quality, and allow plod to use his judgement.

My point, is that those who stick blindly to speed limits, without using their judgement or rational, are by their very nature, very poor drivers who shouldn't be in charge of a motor vehicle.

PPPS - I still hold the wet lap record at Castle Coombe karting circuit, set in '07 in a downpour on slick tyres.... Ok, so this has very little to do with the thread, I just like to brag about it whenever possible!

[Live Peasant]

Believe me, UK drivers are paragons of virtue compared to drivers in Moscow.

There's no concept of lane discipline, indicators are unused, cutting up and undertaking are quite normal as is using the MDAK as a drag strip for the new R8.

The UK's middle-class whiners and members of the central lane owners club would last about 20 seconds here before deciding to sell the car for a lifelong ticket for the metro.

[singlemalt]

Why is it disgusting ?

The state needs the money.

No-one is forcing anyone to break the law.

I'd rather they raised the money by fining people willingly breaking the law than by taxing law abiding people for the work they do.

If anything raising funds in such a way is less disgusting than demanding it out of the pay packets earnt with peoples sweat.

I have no sympathy. If you don't want to pay the "Driving so fast it's a danger to other road users tax" then stay under the speed limit. If you still decide to speed, you knew the rules, you pay the penalty if caught and lower my taxes for me.

To$$£r

[SNACR]

Interesting thing with speeding as law-breaking and criminal etc. is that it's not like anything else particularly as you're effectively being prosecuted for a hypothetical scenario. If you murdered someone they'll always be murdered. It's very much a case of prosecution for what might have happened.

There's also the questionable issue of whether those that enforce the speeding laws really believe in it. A cop on a motorway with a radar gun sees you're speeding and then jumps in his own car and then drives even faster to catch you up. This is similar to you noticing someone running with scissors and then you chasing after them to tell them how dangerous it is but picking up your own pair of scissors before you do so.

As I tour recession Britain slowly driving through towns and villages at 30mph I wonder just exactly who is at danger from being run over. Village after village and not a soul in sight, it's like the country of the damned. There's very rarely any children playing, paedophile hysteria means they're safely indoors growing obese and passing the time on social networking sites. Ironically, an activity that's far more likely to bring them into contact with a paedophile than playing in the local park. Silly people, with goldfish memories, will argue this is because of all the fast traffic but, the traffic's not some modern phenomenom that occured over the last ten years.

Nevermind, as long as we obsess and devote disproportionate resources to all drivers keeping below some arbitrarily applied speed limit these things will all sort themselves out.

[singlemalt]

100 mph on a clear motorway is very safe, however 25 past the school gates at 3pm is reckless.. yet guess which one is illegal?

That's the problem with focussing on speed instead of driver ability and road conditions. An arbitary limit always has to play to the lowest quality of driver out there.

For those people advocating speed limits, let me ask you this: Would you rather be a passenger in:

• a 20 year old lada driven at 59mph down a derestricted country lane by a pensioner with barely legal eyesight in a thunderstorm, or

• 71 mph in a ferrari driven by michael Schumacher on a clear motorway on sunny day

One is legal, the other isn't.

Speed limits are nonsense, the law should concentrate on driver quality, and allow plod to use his judgement.

My point, is that those who stick blindly to speed limits, without using their judgement or rational, are by their very nature, very poor drivers who shouldn't be in charge of a motor vehicle.

PPPS - I still hold the wet lap record at Castle Coombe karting circuit, set in '07 in a downpour on slick tyres.... Ok, so this has very little to do with the thread, I just like to brag about it whenever possible!

+1

The other day on the motorway (day time, dry road, sunny) I was travelling in a car when the driver noticed a car approaching in the rear view at quite a rate of speed. He simply moved over and maintained his speed (96mph). It was our friendly boys in blue in a Volvo V70 in full livery (no blue lights on). They simply cruised past and carried on, good call imo.

Although my friend was driving fast it was certainly no more dangerous than the ubiquitous Nissan Micra driver dithering on the slip road at 30mph or moving into the right hand lane at 70mph.

[LuckyOne]

+1

I would also make anyone who loses there licence

take a block of driving lessons and make them sit

their test again

driving is not a right

Its tossers like Clarkson who think its cool to do

100mph+ on a PUBLIC road

its not its just fekkin dangerous

150 mph on the Autobahn at the right time is completely safe.

50 mph on the Autobahn at the wrong time is very dangerous.

200 mph on a racetrack at the right time is completely safe.

20 mph on a racetrack at the wrong time is very dangerous.

50 mph on an appraoch road into London at the right time is completely safe.

10 mph on a congested urban road in London at the wrong time is very dangerous.

I do not believe for a minute that legislators know more about the difference between "safe" and "dangerous" at a particular moment in time than drivers.

I do believe that legislators try to exert control over drivers at all times.

[Spin Bowler]

To$$£r

Stay classy there single malt.

What I'm saying shouldn't be hard for even the dimmest petrolhead to understand.

Regardless of how unsafe/safe speed is with driving, people accept that there is an increase in danger with speed. It may only be marginal, but it's there.

The second point where this all started was, these states have to raise revenue/cut costs to pay down debt.

Given both those starting points it's hardly uniquely disgusting if they raise that cash from fines for speeding.

If they have to raise £100 surely it's better if they say

"You can all drive from London to Edinborough for free, but if you go over 70mph and we catch you then there is a £100 fine because that impacts safety"

rather than

"There is a new tax of £10 on anyone who drives anywhere at any speed".

At least you can avoid the first, and if you do not do so there is a sense in which you weighed the costs and the benefits to you of speeding and chose to acccept the cost of a fine if caught for the benefit of the extra speed you desired and felt personally safe driving at.

If the alternative is the second, then the first is hardly "utterly disgusting".

[1888]

150 mph on the Autobahn at the right time is completely safe.

50 mph on the Autobahn at the wrong time is very dangerous.

200 mph on a racetrack at the right time is completely safe.

20 mph on a racetrack at the wrong time is very dangerous.

50 mph on an appraoch road into London at the right time is completely safe.

10 mph on a congested urban road in London at the wrong time is very dangerous.

I do not believe for a minute that legislators know more about the difference between "safe" and "dangerous" at a particular moment in time than drivers.

I do believe that legislators try to exert control over drivers at all times.

150 mph is dangerous at anytime

having lived in Germany until just recently I

experienced the Autobahn on a daily basis

and when you get a crash there its usually big and fatal

I would say the discipline they have is excellent compared

to most other nations

lets take just 1 of the examples quoted

50 mph on an appraoch road into London at the right time is completely safe.

that would be when theres no other cars or people about about

I do believe that legislators try to exert control over drivers at all times.

I dont ,I think that idiots get away with murder (literally) time and again

and the punishments rarely fit the crime

Its interesting to note that the Germans altho lax on autobahn limits

will hammer you for indiscipline in towns and villages

and in the cities bikes and pedestrians have more right of way

than cars

its not the laws that are the problem its peoples refusal to follow them

in Germany they follow the laws and outwith autobahns

they have an excellent safety record

Belgium where I now am do not

and the consequences can be seen in their casualty rates

if you want to break the law go ahead

but dont whine when you get fined for doing so

[council dweller]

As with the line from Airplane!

"they knew what they were getting into when they bought their tickets...."

People should make a judgement of the risks and give up driving if they think it's too dangerous. It will never be safe enough for some.

Actually I find driving standards in this country to be pretty good.

[DTMark]

Actually I find driving standards in this country to be pretty good.

Would agree - we have incredibly congested roads, and you rarely see accidents despite this. If the standard of driving was that bad, it would notice far more and we'd have a lot more crashes.

[southmartin]

Would agree - we have incredibly congested roads, and you rarely see accidents despite this. If the standard of driving was that bad, it would notice far more and we'd have a lot more crashes.

If ever driver also had to get up to the standard to pass the motorcycle test to get a car licence, they'd be a lot of very well trained drivers and a drastic reduction in smashes

of course, they'd be a reduction of about 60% on the roads too!