Speeding Loophole Closed

[Barakka]

In which case we shall back-date fines for EVERY time you have broken the speed limit, after all, the laws the law and you were speeding.

Sorry if I didn't make it clear, I was reffering to the way that so many people (not on here necessarily, but many people i've met) whinge when they get caught speeding, or running a red light, or parking illegally. All I meant was I got caught so accepted the punishment, didn't try to find a loophole or wriggle out of it in any way.

BTW - ABS does not shorten your braking distance - it allows you control a skid. I argued this with a mehanic once and he sent me down in flames

[Skii]

Sorry if I didn't make it clear, I was reffering to the way that so many people (not on here necessarily, but many people i've met) whinge when they get caught speeding, or running a red light, or parking illegally. All I meant was I got caught so accepted the punishment, didn't try to find a loophole or wriggle out of it in any way.

BTW - ABS does not shorten your braking distance - it allows you control a skid. I argued this with a mehanic once and he sent me down in flames

Fair play m8 - just illustrating the point that a modern car stops a hell of a lot quicker and under control than its 20 year old counterpart.

[Allen]

I did not say there WAS a child near you at the time, neither did I say you WILL hit a child... what I meant was that IF you hit a child it wouldn't stand a chance and you know it. No need to be pedantic!

Fine, speed in a 30 zone. If you kill someone I'll leave it for your conscience...

I'm gonna try and not mention anything ever again about speeding as you guys obviously have no respect for the law (which is still the LAW whether you agree with it or not!) or other peoples lives.

[Skii]

Oh FFS calm down

I used that example not to illustrate my contempt for the 30mph speed limit, but to illustrate my hatred of legislation that has been created to simply extort money from the automobile user.

We all speed. FACT. At some time or other you WILL break the speed limit, in your original words you said 'I hate speeders'.

Therefore I can assume you have never exceeded a speed limit in your life ?

I didn't think so.

Fact is as human beings we can't avoid speeding because often it is simply the result of human error, and speed cameras capitalise on that.

[Allen]

I agree with you about cameras being placed in such areas to catch people and get more money, but at the end of the day, if people didn't speed there would be no way to make money from them so you're just making it worse for yourself. The more you speed, the more money they make and the more cameras they will put up.

I think there should be no exceptions to the 30 or 40mph speed limits, and anyone breaking them should be punished as they are usually around towns and public places where there is a risk of other people using the roads and drivers should be aware and vigilant. 50-70mph speed limits there should be a margin of 10% to allow for human error. Anything above that is just not necessary.

[Skii]

I agree with you about cameras being placed in such areas to catch people and get more money, but at the end of the day, if people didn't speed there would be no way to make money from them so you're just making it worse for yourself. The more you speed, the more money they make and the more cameras they will put up.

I think there should be no exceptions to the 30 or 40mph speed limits, and anyone breaking them should be punished as they are usually around towns and public places where there is a risk of other people using the roads and drivers should be aware and vigilant. 50-70mph speed limits there should be a margin of 10% to allow for human error. Anything above that is just not necessary.

I agree with this partly, however I want to see less cameras and more police - cameras cannot spot a dangerous driver, a policeman can.

I want to see the Police using their training and experience to judge which drivers are putting the publics lives at risk, and those who have merely made a small error of judgement.

And 70 mph is too slow for the motorway IMHO.

[Knoxville]

This argument again eh, Al your right, the average car travelling at 35mph takes longer to stop than the car travelling at the limit, i've seen the advert which despite stating the facts isn't the be all and end all.

If i do 35/6mph down a road near me at 2am how many kids are gonna be around for me to hit? for that matter unless its new years and even then im pushing the limits of reality how many friggin adults am i gonna hit? a speeding offence imo should not just be justified by how fast you were going in a certain limit but at the conditions. Kids ain't stupid dude, i live between 3 MAJOR primary and secondary schools, kids don't just wander into the road for fun.

Catching speeders is not just for the safety of the public as the government would have you believe, its very naieve to think cameras are there to catch people that break the limits near blackspots or schools. There are many that are there simply for revenue, there's one about 20minutes walk away from me, there have been no accidents down there in my lifetime as i can remember other than the odd shunt as someone's reversed out too quickly yet last year they put up a speed camera, where do they put it? at the bottom of the hill but slightly round the corner behind a tree so it ain't visible. Its there for revenue, nothing more.

I'm not saying your wrong Al, because speeding alot of the time is un-necassary and pointless, but an equal amount of the time it occurs because people are paying attention to the road more than they're speedo and don't realise they're doing 35mph instead of 30, i mean can you tell the difference?

I disagree in part with Skii's statement, i think in some conditions (weather etc.) that 70mph is too high, but on a summer night where the roads clear i see no reasons as modern cars are capable of much higher speeds while still being stable and safe.

[Allen]

Nicely put, Knoxville. I wish I had the ability to stay calmer and get my point accross clearly. I did say earlier about most cameras being placed to make money rather than catch dangerous drivers. I know kids aren't stupid but accidents do happen, and the safer you're driving, the less chance of fatality.

I see your point about at 2am and such, but really... why do you feel it necessary to do 35/36mph when 30mph will suffice? I know it's difficult to tell the difference when you're concentrating on the road... perhaps a HUD of some sort would help (Ok, sounds stupid, but it could help!)?

About the weather conditions bit, the only way you could possibly do that is to have a variable speed limit depending on conditions and that would mean spend a lot of money on people or computers to do that, where as the government will be happier to stick it to 70mph and put up cameras. More police and less cameras is ideal, but will it ever happen?

[Knoxville]

The point i mentioned about time was that during the day when kids are likely to be around then fair play be harsher on people caught by the cameras, but at times like i mentioned i think the factor that the driver was causing little danger wether his speed was deliberate or accidental should be taken into consideration and the punishment be much lighter or the offence dismissed depending on the speed

[floppybootstomp]

Simply put, on a motorway or open stretch of road where there are no pedestrians about, I'll regularly top 100mph and thoroughly enjoy it.

Before the introduction of speed cameras, I regularly drove from Newcastle to the London end of the M1 at a steady 90mph, usually at night, with music full on.

And I still tend to hit the last stretch of the North Circular from Edmonton to Woolwich Ferry, at around 70, slowing only for cameras.

In town, I'll actually stay under the limit, be it 20 or 30 mph, I'm very aware of kids crossing roads, makes me nervous.

So that, for good or for bad, is how I drive and I don't think I'm endangering anybody.

As for the loophole, was only a matter of time anyway.

[Stoo]

If everyone obeyed the speed limits then they'd just find some other way of extracting their pound of flesh.

Al, I agree about the 30 limit in residential areas, but the sheer amound of stupid speed limits placed by councils that do *nothing* but increase revenues from speeding fines and cause fustration and congestion beggers belief.

For instance Norfolk county council are one of the worst for doing placing stupid limits..

• 40mph on a large chunk of dual carriageway?
• 50mph on another dual carriageway that's straight as an arrow, then hiding layby's for the police to sit in happily zapping fred blogs coming home from work.
• 40mph limit on a new *bypass*, which ends up being slower than going through the village it bypasses..
• Putting a 40mph limit just after a bypass (which has no end of national speed limit sign) *after* a bend in the road which hides a *minute* 40 mph sign again with a layby a few yards after the tiny sign which again the police use to zap people coming off the bypass and either not seeing the sign or not getting down to 40 quick enough. Again, there's no reason for the limit as there's nothing around for miles

..and that's only a small taster of it on a single 30 minute journey

Numerous surveys have concluded that speed cameras have zero impact on serious accident figures, and that a lot of accidents are caused from driver fustration from bad road layouts and questionable speed limits.

You drive to suit the conditions of the road on which you are driving, which in turn aids healthy traffic flow. Obviously if it's a residential area you keep your speed down (in fact there are some areas where I live where I won't to more than 15 or 20 despite the limit still being 30, because the conditions dictate otherwise), likewise on some of the narrow country roads where anything over 40 is asking for trouble, but speeding on the vast majority of the UK's open roads will never harm *anyone* (apart from the odd rabbit), and it's just councils and governments taxing the motorist by another means.

Saying that *all* speeders are bad and must be punished is quite ludicrous TBH.

[Big RICHARD]

I can't believe that anyone is ok with speeding! Do you not care for that little girl crossing the road or the old lady who can't get out of the way in time? Ok, maybe the're not supposed to be in the middle of the road but when cars are as big and as heavy and as fast as they are, it is the responsibility of the DRIVER to drive at such speeds where they can control the situation and stop in time, not to toot their horn and shout abuse at people in their way making them slow down below the speed limit.

What are the little girl and the old lady doing on the motorway?

[Allen]

Richard: I said road not motorway.

Stoo: I agree about most speed cameras being placed stupidly, but I still think speeding needs to be clamped down on, as well as other major driving offences. You obviously think speeding is ok, but it's the law. Until it's changed you have to accept responsibility for breaking it otherwise I could go and murder someone right now and say, 'Well it's ok, cause I don't think killing should be illegal'

[[GSV]Trig]

Oh I love these arguments about hitting kids and killing them cos your doing 37 not 30 in a 30 zone...

And yet again I will bring up the same point I always do...

TEACH KIDS ROAD SAFETY!!!

You can hit a kid at 5mph and kill him, its nothing to do with speed, the more cars there are on the road the more accidents there will be, its logical, stop speeders yes maybe thats 1 side of it, teach the kids to cross the bloody road and then your targetting both sides of the problem....

[Stoo]

The simple fact is you can usually get away with some speeding and most people do, including those who are responsible for enforcing the law (off duty police, judges, lawyers, councillors, politicians etc etc, even driving instructors!), and in most cases it's a victimless crime.
Just because I disagree with the way that law is upheld doesn't mean I don't accept responsibility for my actions.

How many people break the law every day? Downloading software, music, looking at porn (surprisingly, a hell of a lot of normal internet porn is still illegal in the UK), serving intoxicated people in a pub or bar, having a quiet toke on a spliff, etc etc.

People aren't disagreeing with the law on speeding, but the way in which it is being handled, in this case the punishment often does not fit the crime, and drivers are being unfairly treated because they are a soft target.
Councils put in cameras and limits purely to generate revenue, and police are on performance related pay, getting a bonus for the numbers of speeders they stop and ticket. The same doesn't occur for other crimes, because there isn't the incentive there to go after them, and the police use their discretion and judgment to weigh up if they are actually doing any damage.

If we all just quietly accepted things at face value, we'd end up with no civil liberties at all, if nobody ever said anything nothing would ever change and most of the antiquated old laws would still be in effect today.

Speaking out != shirking responsibility.

[Skii]

/\

Rather splendidly put, Sir.