Drive the M4?

[Zak33]

but I did say earlier that 50 should really be the slowest you should go on a motorway.

SO (HAH!).....would you find it acceptable to impose a fine upon a person for doing 40mph on the M1? And give them penalty points?

Would it be acceptable to "Flash" them with a GATSO and send them a letter a fortnight later to impose the £60 fne and effect their Insurance premiums for the next 5 years? For "Slowing" (I invented that...oppositve of Speeding )

[Byatt]

Also, in threads like these, especially on another forum (not mentioning names), I see a lot of people arguing that speeding is fine so long as 'you're sensible'.

This is ridiculous.

The problem with going over 70mph is that, in the event of something happening, you're reducing your chances of survival. You have less reaction time, more stopping distance, etc, etc. It's all very well saying 'as long as you're sensible' but sensibility won't prepare you for the unexpected. I lost control of my car at 110mph on the M6, it wasn't particularly busy, maybe 6 other cars around me. But I fishtailed across 2 lanes for some considerable distance before regaining control. I feel lucky I survived. It was daft to be doing that speed to begin with but since then I've stuck to 70mph, of course I'll sometimes drift to 80mph but soon correct things. The people who say 'as long as you're sensible' haven't yet experienced 'the unexpected'. I'm sure if they did they might think otherwise.

This post needs more attention.

[Zak33]

50 in the middle lane is dangerous, I agree,

you too.....so what we have here (other than me timing my thread posts to try to capture too of the most awesome debating minds on Hexus) is a case of IMPOSE A FINE FOR SOMEONE DOING A FAST DANGEROUS ACT, BUT NOT FOR A SLOW DANGEROUS ACT.

By post. 2 weeks later.

Surely...surely a POLICEMAN and not a camera would be best for this.

I truly beieve it would be.

[Zak33]

This post needs more attention.

/stands to attention

[Allen]

SO (HAH!).....would you find it acceptable to impose a fine upon a person for doing 40mph on the M1? And give them penalty points?

Would it be acceptable to "Flash" them with a GATSO and send them a letter a fortnight later to impose the £60 fne and effect their Insurance premiums for the next 5 years? For "Slowing" (I invented that...oppositve of Speeding )

I don't think I ever said it would be right to drive that slowly on a motorway, so I don't understand why you're asking me that... I just said that you don't have to drive along AT the speed limit.

If it's actually against the law to drive slower than 50 on a motorway in certain sections, then yes, they should be fined and given points on their licence.

[Zak33]

If it's actually against the law to drive slower than 50 on a motorway in certain sections, then yes, they should be find and given points on their licence.

by Camera?

[Allen]

by Camera?

That surely couldn't happen. You couldn't possibly prove that you had to slam on your brakes to avoid a rabbit or something. Also, what about traffic jams on motorways? Would the camera be flashing every 5 seconds?

:edit: Besides, I see about 7 out of 10 people driving over 70 on a motorway, I don't think I've seen any other cars, except those towing caravans, going less than 50, from what I can tell.

[dkmech]

Also, in threads like these, especially on another forum (not mentioning names), I see a lot of people arguing that speeding is fine so long as 'you're sensible'.

This is ridiculous.

The problem with going over 70mph is that, in the event of something happening, you're reducing your chances of survival. You have less reaction time, more stopping distance, etc, etc. It's all very well saying 'as long as you're sensible' but sensibility won't prepare you for the unexpected. I lost control of my car at 110mph on the M6, it wasn't particularly busy, maybe 6 other cars around me. But I fishtailed across 2 lanes for some considerable distance before regaining control. I feel lucky I survived. It was daft to be doing that speed to begin with but since then I've stuck to 70mph, of course I'll sometimes drift to 80mph but soon correct things. The people who say 'as long as you're sensible' haven't yet experienced 'the unexpected'. I'm sure if they did they might think otherwise.

I think the majority of people is not asking to be let off doing more than 85 on the motorways. Which was the situation before this m4 thing. I would look separately at the issue of being able to go a bit faster at night on an empty road. I personally don't think that there is that much scope for increasing the limits. Don't think more than 90 would be sensible as even motorways have turns and you may not be able to see quite as far ahead as one would think.

However now you will be prosecuted for 79. As you say yourself, even when you try to do 70 you creep up to 80 every now and then. I feel better and pay more attention to the road when I know that if my speed creeps up a bit I can calmly reduce it without having to do the chameleon thing and keep one eye on the road and one on the speedo. If I need to overtake a car in the middle lane i prefer to pass it and get back into my lane with the aid of a speed difference of at least a couple of miles ( you are going to tell me not to overtake now, won't you) and not fear that i will be nicked unless during a maneuvre i pay attention to speedo and not the road.

[Zak33]

That surely couldn't happen. You couldn't possibly prove that you had to slam on your brakes to avoid a rabbit or something. Also, what about traffic jams on motorways? Would the camera be flashing every 5 seconds?

:edit: Besides, I see about 7 out of 10 people driving over 70 on a motorway, I don't think I've seen any other cars, except those towing caravans, going less than 50, from what I can tell.

You see, I truly belive that a POLICE PRESENCE and not a load of new camera's on the M4 would help sort ALL these problems.

More marked cars, more officers, more motorways covered, quicker response to break downs, more people seeing the car and slowing to a sensible speed and a load of human beings in police cars doing their job, not a digital network of camera's trying to raise my insurance premium for a 10 mph discretion.

I hate camera's and those are most of the reasons.

[Knoxville]

Knoxxy can you please answer my question. What, exactly, do you want the law changed to?

We already have variable limits on the road, with an upper limit known as the speed limit. You have to control your speed based on the conditions at the time. What is so difficult to understand?

Its my opinion that the upper limit could occaisionally be raised under the right conditions, hot night in the middle of july, its 3am and there's nothing on the roads why should we not be able to drive slightly faster in optimum conditions?

Zak, can you just explain to me why cameras should be banned? Are you saying that people should be allowed to speed?

Camera's don't stop speeders they just catch them, a greater marked police presence would make people slow down and drive more carefully.

But do you disagree that a crash at 155 compared to 70, isn’t going to have a significantly higher chance of causing serious injury and / or fatality’s ?

I agree there is a higher chance of fatality or injury, you plow into something solid at 70mph though and the chance of fatality is already very very high, where do you draw the line between acceptable and unacceptable death rates?

I agree with you 100% on re-assesment though, even if the conclusion were to come out at 70mph being optimal again it would stop people like me asking questions.

People don't accept my opinions, why should I accept theirs? Driving even 10mph over the speed limit in any speed zone is unlawful and in certain areas very dangerous, so no, I won't accept that it's OK to do it.

Never asked you too accept it's ok, maybe just to accept that going 5mph over the limit on an empty dual carrage way or motorway while breaking the law doesn't kill people every day, infact i'd wager that more children die from collisions that occur while the driver is travelling at or indeed under the limit.

I wouldn't know too much about that, as I wasn't even aware that speedo's where 20% out tbh. If it was the case, speedo's would be changed, would they not?

Unfortunatly the extremely accurate ways of measuring speed are still relatively expensive, speedo's have improved with everything else over the years but not everyone drives a brand spanking new car.

I'm not picking on anyone. I just don't understand how some people will simply refute the fact that speeding is dangerous, hence why we have speed limits. The only reason the speed limit on motorways is 70 is probably because you should only have vehicles on them. In towns it is more likely to have pedestrians, stray animals, bicycles and the like in roads, therefore you have to drive slower to be careful of them. After all, you are in the machine that can kill, not them.

I'm not saying that speeding isn't dangerous, I'm saying its not always dangerous, its a calculated risk you take, some people as you say don't think and drive like idiots, others however know the limits of themselves and their vehicle and will choose to speed when the risk to themselves and others is very small.

[Allen]

I think the majority of people is not asking to be let off doing more than 85 on the motorways. Which was the situation before this m4 thing. I would look separately at the issue of being able to go a bit faster at night on an empty road. I personally don't think that there is that much scope for increasing the limits. Don't think more than 90 would be sensible as even motorways have turns and you may not be able to see quite as far ahead as one would think.

But at night, for example, you won't be able to see half as much in front of you than during the day, so you should be even more cautious, unless it's a lit part of the motorway, but you still won't have brilliant vision.

Also, if they changed it so you could drive at 90 at night, all the youngsters and "bad boy racers" etc will be out in force, not that they don't already, which certainly won't be good!

[schmunk]

Lorry != Car.

Bit like buses. They ahve slightly different laws

That's not the point - you said that driving at 50 or 60 on a motorway is "Careless or inconsiderate driving." How is a car following a lorry at 56mph careless or inconsiderate?

[Allen]

Never asked you too accept it's ok, maybe just to accept that going 5mph over the limit on an empty dual carrage way or motorway while breaking the law doesn't kill people every day, infact i'd wager that more children die from collisions that occur while the driver is travelling at or indeed under the limit.

Maybe 5mph won't make much of a difference at those speeds, but surely you have to agree that a death is a death, and if you can stop just a few by stoping people speeding then it's worth it? I know more may occur at or under the limit, but that's down to driver training and/or lack of driving skills.

I'm not saying that speeding isn't dangerous, I'm saying its not always dangerous, its a calculated risk you take, some people as you say don't think and drive like idiots, others however know the limits of themselves and their vehicle and will choose to speed when the risk to themselves and others is very small.

But who are you (the driver, not aimed directly at you Knox) to determin the level of risk you are putting anyone else at? Most drivers care more about getting from A to B quicker than making sure IF you have an accident the chance of a fatality of you, your passenger or people in the other vehicle are reduced, maybe even just slightly reduced.

[Howard]

That's not the point - you said that driving at 50 or 60 on a motorway is "Careless or inconsiderate driving." How is a car following a lorry at 56mph careless or inconsiderate?

THere are exceptions to every rule you know. Lol. And besides it is entirely the point... HGVs are different to cars.
99% of people I see who come up behind a lorry doing 56MPh will overtake it.

[rajagra]

But who are you (the driver, not aimed directly at you Knox) to determin the level of risk you are putting anyone else at?

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

[Zak33]

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

/sharp intake of breath....

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