Drive the M4?

[Swafe]

I dont get why this is causing such a fuss, its the first motorway speed camera?

Heck is it, theres been a 50 limit, and 50 speed limit cameras on the M42 by me for the best part of a year 'roadworks' they call it, but they dont do jack apart from rake the cash in day by day from people going over 50, it annoys me.

[Allen]

He is the person in control of the vehicle! Who on earth else can possibly choose the safest speed?

My point was, what gives the driver the right to chose to speed if it's going to be a) against the law, and b) putting other people's lives at risk (whether it be by a small margin or not)? I for one surely wouldn't want it on my conscience.

/sharp intake of breath....

BLINDER what a retort top notch....top top notch.

Didn't realise this was a competition...

[iranu]

Allen - if the LAW required you to put your head in an oven and turn the gas on would you follow it because it's the law? (yes I'm well aware we don't have town gas anymore)

My point is this - Bad law deserves to be broken.

On my M4 commute I would estimate that 75% of cars are travelling quicker than 70mph. The vast majority do this safely.
I can guaruntee that ALL those drivers would vote for an increase to 80mph. Even the police will not pull you over if doing 80mph unless you are driving dangerously.

70mph is too lower limit on motorways for normal traffic densities.

We have people equating speed with danger - it is NOT so. I can drive at 20mph in a 30mph zone AND STILL BE DANGEROUS. No speed camera is going to catch me out.

Equally for example I can drive at 50mph on a motorway in desnse fog and snow and STILL be dangerous even though I'm BELOW THE LEGAL LIMIT, which some here seem to take as gospel.

SPEED DOES NOT CAUSE ACCIDENTS - IT IS THE INAPROPRIATE USE OF SPEED THAT CAUSES THEM.

Put speed cameras in accident blackspots. Make them well sign posted.
Increase the number of police cars on the motorway who will pick up on dangerous driving as opposed to speed cameras which don't.

I was once caught at 94mph on the M4 (my 1 offence in 15 years of driving). I asked the copper if I was driving dangerously and putting peoples lives at risk. He replied, "No Sir, if you had been we would have nicked you for that too".

As I followed him up the motorway cars were passing him at 80 - 85mph tailgating each other. He did nothing. So if the police don't think 80-85 is a problem why do people here?

[Oakey]

Allen - if the LAW required you to put your head in an oven and turn the gas on would you follow it because it's the law? (yes I'm well aware we don't have town gas anymore)

My point is this - Bad law deserves to be broken.

On my M4 commute I would estimate that 75% of cars are travelling quicker than 70mph. The vast majority do this safely.
I can guaruntee that ALL those drivers would vote for an increase to 80mph. Even the police will not pull you over if doing 80mph unless you are driving dangerously.

70mph is too lower limit on motorways for normal traffic densities.

We have people equating speed with danger - it is NOT so. I can drive at 20mph in a 30mph zone AND STILL BE DANGEROUS. No speed camera is going to catch me out.

Equally for example I can drive at 50mph on a motorway in desnse fog and snow and STILL be dangerous even though I'm BELOW THE LEGAL LIMIT, which some here seem to take as gospel.

SPEED DOES NOT CAUSE ACCIDENTS - IT IS THE INAPROPRIATE USE OF SPEED THAT CAUSES THEM.

Put speed cameras in accident blackspots. Make them well sign posted.
Increase the number of police cars on the motorway who will pick up on dangerous driving as opposed to speed cameras which don't.

I was once caught at 94mph on the M4 (my 1 offence in 15 years of driving). I asked the copper if I was driving dangerously and putting peoples lives at risk. He replied, "No Sir, if you had been we would have nicked you for that too".

As I followed him up the motorway cars were passing him at 80 - 85mph tailgating each other. He did nothing. So if the police don't think 80-85 is a problem why do people here?

You obviously missed my post then. You kind of sum up exactly what I said.

[Moby-Dick]

so if the Motorway limit was increased to 80mph ( as has been hinted at by certain politicians ) then you still think that 80mph is too fast ?

speed limits are not always there for saftey - look at the US limit of 55mph. It was put in place to conserve oil reserves.

I'm not anti-camera , in fact I am pro camera , just get the damn things in the correct places !

[Swafe]

I'd be up for a 80 limit, maybe even a 90 limit ?

Too fast? Never ! Its the drivers choice, he does what speed he does safe upto 90, if he feels safe doing 90, why the hell shouldnt he if its legal and everything?

Obviously, if a 90 limit was imposed and people did 90 just because they could, on a busy motorway weaving in and out like a mad man, I wouldnt think it was a good idea.

Its down to the drivers, if they DID introduce a 80 limit, it doesnt mean you have to drive at 80, just what you feel is safe, upto 80.

[rajagra]

My closing thought on the subject:

Where is the one place where excessive speed - on it's own - will cause accidents?
Answer: on bends in the road.

How many speed cameras have you seen located at tight bends?

Says it all, really.


Drive carefully everyone.

[BroadbandPlacey]

recently ive done abit of motorway driving, and personally ive felt comfortable cruising along at 80, even in my 0.9l fiat cinq. its a place where as long as conditions are right with good visibility there is no reasons why you shouldn't be able to do 80-90 SAFELY

can i ditto the above point as well. and answer the rhetorical question - no they dont put speed cameras on corners because they know it would be a waste of time, thats why they sit at the end of long straight's cos they want more cash!!!

[Allen]

Allen - if the LAW required you to put your head in an oven and turn the gas on would you follow it because it's the law? (yes I'm well aware we don't have town gas anymore)

That's a stupid comparison tbh.

My point is this - Bad law deserves to be broken.

Then you deserve to be put in prison if you think you can break the law just because you don't think the law is right.

We have people equating speed with danger - it is NOT so. I can drive at 20mph in a 30mph zone AND STILL BE DANGEROUS. No speed camera is going to catch me out.

There are dangerous drivers that stick to the speed limits and there are dangerous drivers that break the speed limits (but more often the latter). Allowing the vast amount of bad drivers this country has to drive even faster will certainly result in more accidents, and due to the increased speed, probably more injuries and fatalities.

SPEED DOES NOT CAUSE ACCIDENTS - IT IS THE INAPROPRIATE USE OF SPEED THAT CAUSES THEM.

Accidents are caused by a vast majority of things. Saying they are definately not caused by travelling faster is just plain stupid if you ask me. Someone can blow out a tyre or something and veer quickly into your lane, if you are travelling at a slower speed you WILL have more time to react and perhaps stop yourself slamming into them, going at a faster speed you WILL NOT have as much time to react, therefore the chance of an accident involving you will increase. That's just 1 example of many ways speeding can cause accidents, or at least involve your fast moving car into an accident already "in progress" if you like increasing the chance of injuries or fatalities.

I was once caught at 94mph on the M4 (my 1 offence in 15 years of driving). I asked the copper if I was driving dangerously and putting peoples lives at risk. He replied, "No Sir, if you had been we would have nicked you for that too".

Then he was an idiot of a copper, they aren't all perfect.

As I followed him up the motorway cars were passing him at 80 - 85mph tailgating each other. He did nothing. So if the police don't think 80-85 is a problem why do people here?

Again, one idiot of a copper doens't mean the whole force, or the whole justice system, thinks 80-85mph on a motorway is ok!

[Stoo]

TBH, if the government was that concerned with speeding, they'd simply introduce a new law restricting the maximum speed of every car to 70mph (after all, it's a limit, not a target), in a similar way that HGV's are restricted to 56, and Tractors are limited to 40 (if you're lucky!).

But they don't, because then they'd lose out on the massive revenue generation that *not* enforcing a hard limit brings in.

[DaBeeeenster]

I was under the impression that HGVs are not limited, but their speed is recorded, so old bill can check they have not been over the limit...

[Allen]

I was under the impression that HGVs are not limited, but their speed is recorded, so old bill can check they have not been over the limit...

Yes, they have to put a paper dial on/under the speedo (or a technique very similar to that) which records the speeds that they travel.

[Zak33]

lots of HGV's are limited to make the drivers life easier.

Right, lets be clear on all of this:

No one should be mortally offending anyone else.
No one should TAKE OFFENSE at someone elses views on this thread.

It is now waaay too serious for a friendly discussion. Some peple speed, some people say they don't but do, and some people don't at all.

I think that we are about set to wrap this one up.

My biggest issue with the way this thread has gone is that people are reading insults into reply's, insults that I am sure aren't there, so I ask you all, please, try not to be too sensitive.

[DaBeeeenster]

I'm still waiting for some actual new rules for the road from people who think the 70 limit is unacceptable.

[Firelord]

. Someone can blow out a tyre or something and veer quickly into your lane, if you are travelling at a slower speed you WILL have more time to react and perhaps stop yourself slamming into them, going at a faster speed you WILL NOT have as much time to react

The same can happen at 60 or 70mph and the resultwill be the same. How many people do you think that when faced with a tyre blowout are actually gonna know what to do? I should think a good 60% of the population would freeze and just let the accident happen because they don't know what to do. So in that instance speed is irrelevnt.

I think the main point here is that speed doesn't kill, its the innaproppriate use of speed that does. By your definition Allen anyone doing 71mph is a speeder, a dangerous driver and should be penalised for it.

I think what should happen is that they update the antiquated motorway speeding limit (first set when cars struggled to 70mph) to a more realistic 85-9mph. This would then coincide with the safer vehicles we drive today compared to the 60s and would mean that we would have more realistic idea of speeding.

The issue with speed cameras is that they are also wrong in a scientific sense. A scientist who was caught recently 'speeding' (he claims to not have ever speed as he agrees with the limits) ran some tests (published roughly a month ago in Auto Express) and found a serious problem with speed devices.

For instance Gatsos should flash at 500ms intervals across a set distance but about 28% of those he tested flashed between 550 and 700ms which would make people appear to be speeding. In addition the hand held devices can easily be made to make the driver appear as though they were going quicker than they are; all it takes is a sligh movement such as a sneeze or shiver to put the results out by as much as 10mph... He therefore proved he wasn't actually speeding at all...

What I think should happen is to stop the reliance on speed cameras and bring back the traffic police like they had in the 80's when speeding wasn't such a big issue because of these officers.

Place speed cameras around schools and hospitals etc but not on motorways, thats not safety; thats money grabbing.

Traffice police would also be far more likely to be aware of time, conditions etc and be able to have the power of discretion. Speed cameras don't catch middle lane hoggers, tail gaters, people not indicating, people driving dangerously they just pick on speeders. Alot of accidents are caused by bad driving and not by speed.

I freely admit I drive at 80mph on the motorways and do so with a 3-4 car length gap in front of me and do so if the conditions are ok (ie not driving rain or thick fog) but have nearly had accidents on the motorways at slower speeds in the left/middle lane due to planks who are bad drivers but not speeders who pull out in front at slower speeds without indicating for example.

Instead of penalising people for speeding they should be educating the bad drivers (whether they be speeders or not) which can only be achieved through the judicious use of speed cameras and through better traffic policing....

And i'm spent

[Flibb]

Ok new law, just a starting pointbut what do you think?

Further roll out of variable speed limits across the motorway system

Increase top speed allowable to 90mph, dependent on the above.

Investment in speed cameras to be targeted at non motorway areas.

Investment in a visible human police presence on the motorways.

Increase the penalties for dangerous driving, driving without due care, etc.

Mandatory 20mph speed limit on school roads.

Motorway driving to be included as a compulsory element of the driving instruction. But only registered driving instructors to be allowed to take a learner on the motorway.