New speeding rules next week, don't forget....

petach said:
"But I can't accept 81 on a motorway as a risk"

Therein is the problem. Most people (apart from thieving or perverted scum) think that theft is bad, burglary is bad, rape is bad. There is no such thing as a bit of theft, or a bit of burglary or a bit of rape. The law; including traffic law is absolute, but it chafes against our own ideas of what is ridiculous in law, against our perception of how good we are as a driver. In that case, we are happy to push at the boundary with a sticky plaster over our conscience. If everyone acted as though some laws were not applicable to them we would obviously have anarchy.

I think motoring laws are an interesting philosophical and psychological conundrum revolving around how we feel about our cars and our personal space in them. Everyone is a great driver.

Funny enough, after I wrote my original post I nipped out in the Z. On a residential street, there was a Honda Civic (trilby and blanket on parcel shelf) driven by a werthers sucking lady of a certain age. She was doing spot on 30 in a 30 limit. Hanging almost off her bumper was a Honda CRV determined to push her speed upwards or looking for room to overtake. In the end, the Civic turned off and the CRV accelerated to ooooh about 33mph! So, what was that all about? The CRV tosser thought 30 didn't apply to him and that he should be able to proceed at a little over the limit. Rank and utter driving without due care because the person in front stuck to the limit. Is the law causing the danger by frustrating drivers who want to "push on"? or is it the driver him or her self.

Every action has an equal and opposite reaction. It will be interesting to see what will come to pass when these new tariffs are brought in. Will there actually be more accidents if more people stick rigidly to the limit and those who want to "push on" or "make progress" hang within a werthers breath trying to pass at a speed that THEY think is reasonable for them?
Click to expand...


Sorry but no - don't compare me in the same bracket as someone choosing to break the law by raping someone (wtf is that kind of comparison ! Ha ha wow), because I say I see no risk in me doing 81 over 70 in a car that's way more advanced at stopping than I can even compute. Rape = doing 81 in a 70. Yeppppppp just the same philosophy hey. Wow.
 
-Tom- said:
petach said:
"But I can't accept 81 on a motorway as a risk"

Therein is the problem. Most people (apart from thieving or perverted scum) think that theft is bad, burglary is bad, rape is bad. There is no such thing as a bit of theft, or a bit of burglary or a bit of rape. The law; including traffic law is absolute, but it chafes against our own ideas of what is ridiculous in law, against our perception of how good we are as a driver. In that case, we are happy to push at the boundary with a sticky plaster over our conscience. If everyone acted as though some laws were not applicable to them we would obviously have anarchy.

I think motoring laws are an interesting philosophical and psychological conundrum revolving around how we feel about our cars and our personal space in them. Everyone is a great driver.

Funny enough, after I wrote my original post I nipped out in the Z. On a residential street, there was a Honda Civic (trilby and blanket on parcel shelf) driven by a werthers sucking lady of a certain age. She was doing spot on 30 in a 30 limit. Hanging almost off her bumper was a Honda CRV determined to push her speed upwards or looking for room to overtake. In the end, the Civic turned off and the CRV accelerated to ooooh about 33mph! So, what was that all about? The CRV tosser thought 30 didn't apply to him and that he should be able to proceed at a little over the limit. Rank and utter driving without due care because the person in front stuck to the limit. Is the law causing the danger by frustrating drivers who want to "push on"? or is it the driver him or her self.

Every action has an equal and opposite reaction. It will be interesting to see what will come to pass when these new tariffs are brought in. Will there actually be more accidents if more people stick rigidly to the limit and those who want to "push on" or "make progress" hang within a werthers breath trying to pass at a speed that THEY think is reasonable for them?
Click to expand...


Sorry but no - don't compare me in the same bracket as someone choosing to break the law by raping someone (wtf is that kind of comparison ! Ha ha wow), because I say I see no risk in me doing 81 over 70 in a car that's way more advanced at stopping than I can even compute. Rape = doing 81 in a 70. Yeppppppp just the same philosophy hey. Wow.
Click to expand...

I think you misread my post. I said "The law; including traffic law is absolute" I made a distinction. The reason I made that distinction is because a lot of people think that traffic law is something that is not mandatory, that it is flexible depending on your own need at a particular moment. Traffic law is passed by the same people that pass other laws on the statute books....people are careless about it. Laws are not passed willy nilly. Traffic law in respect of speed is made in consultation and based on science and statistics. "I'd like to do 81mph on a motorway, but I am not allowed to which is absurd" Of course I am not comparing you with a thief or rapist. And, that is why I called it an interesting philosophical conundrum in that people who would not consider, even remotely, committing a serious crime are happy to commit other perceived lesser and more socially acceptable offences which could actually have an even worse effect on someone's life. So, there is no risk in doing 81 instead of 70? Your car is way more advanced at stopping. But, are you capable of putting that in motion quickly? How quick are your reactions? How much more distance would you cover at 81 instead of 70? before your brain even thinks of moving your braking foot. All these things are thought out to try to reduce road casualties. Not everyone on the road in a fast car....or any car.....is a 20year old with lightning reflexes. There are all sorts of capabilities and we have all seen people where we have thought "wtf, why has he or she got a driving license"? The law of averages comes into play and everyone has to abide by the laws laid down to take account of the lowest common denominator. You may be a great driver, but you may be surrounded by idiots. You need to be protected from them, and yes, the idiots need to be protected from themselves

I am sorry that you think I was comparing you with a thief or rapist.....nothing of the sort, but my point still stands. It might be helpful if you read the post again.
 
original guvnor said:
Most of the EU has a 130km/h limit on motorways. Funny that we have been so enthusiastic adopting other EU-wide directives/legislation etc but choose not to adopt that one.
Click to expand...

The UK (at last count) had 31 deaths per 1 million population. All other European countries had higher death rates. Most were 40-59 deaths per 1 million and some over 80 per 1 million. People may say there are lies, damned lies and statistics. But what else is there to prove a point?
 
Netherlands has lower rates by the way and more traffic and a higher speed limit. There are other facts in place there, i.e. The driving test standards are a lot, lot higher than in the UK.
 
petach said:
original guvnor said:
Most of the EU has a 130km/h limit on motorways. Funny that we have been so enthusiastic adopting other EU-wide directives/legislation etc but choose not to adopt that one.
Click to expand...

The UK (at last count) had 31 deaths per 1 million population. All other European countries had higher death rates. Most were 40-59 deaths per 1 million and some over 80 per 1 million. People may say there are lies, damned lies and statistics. But what else is there to prove a point?
Click to expand...

But are you looking at motorway casualty rates or all roads? I'm talking about motorway speed limits. If we set all road speed limits to 20mph we'll have the safest roads in the world but at what cost to our society as a whole? Yes death and serious injury will be very low but so will our productivity too. The point being that road safety is not the only consideration to take into account when setting speed limits. And we have a productivity issue compared to our EU rivals.
 
In Manchester we have had average speed cameras in place on the motorways for a while now due to works, to be honest I have never felt safer on the motorway as everyone is doing the same speed, maybe this is the way forwards . Albeit a little more than 50mph.
 
On my recent cough, SAC the stats given were that in 2015 there were 1,732 road fatalities a decrease of 41 from 2014. When you think that in 2000 the number was 3,409 or more than double and in 2006 the figure was still 3,172 Of those 1,732 - 507 were pedestrians and cyclists, so I would think only a VERY small number of those would have been on a motorway at the time. Source; https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/533293/rrcgb-main-results-2015.pdf

Percentage wise, motorways accounted for a very small proportion of those figures, something like 100 people, which when you consider that the number of vehicles on the road has increased from around 27.2 million in 2000, to around 31.7 million last year....

Motorways are our safest roads, and personally I see no harm in raising the speed limit to 90, as I previously stated. People who aren't comfortable at that speed will simply stick to the 50, 60 or 70 that they are happy with now.

Just my 2p in this 'ole can of worms I seem to have opened!

Mike
 
Confused® said:
In Manchester we have had average speed cameras in place on the motorways for a while now due to works, to be honest I have never felt safer on the motorway as everyone is doing the same speed, maybe this is the way forwards . Albeit a little more than 50mph.
Click to expand...

Likewise, I wouldn't have a problem if they were to line the country with SPECS and the likes on motorways, provided they increased the limit...

Mike
 
DPG said:
Yeah, now those artics can sit on your chuff all the way to work.
Click to expand...
Or when you're boxed in with a truck on your left, a white van man on your right, other cars about 2 metres behind & in front of you.

You just know that if there is an accident, it will involve lots of vehicles as they're so closely packed, and there's nowhere to 'escape' - although it may not have any fatalities as you're all going the same speed.

I was regularly driving those 50MPH limits on the M6 (J11-J14, Stafford to M6 Toll) for over 4 years going between Liverpool & London. Was so happy when they disappeared. Unfortunately they were replaced by another effin set a few miles further up the motorway (J16-J19, Stoke to ) for the next 4 years. Then they'll be starting on the next phase (J13-J15). It never effing ends - 12 years of roadwork-induced delays, to ave a couple of minutes over the next 10 years, where they'll decide they need some more roadworks :headbang:

I'd leave home at 5am, and invariably fail I'd turn onto the M6 from the M56 or M62 (depending on roadworks at Runcorn) and by J19 I'd be stuck in a queue for 15-60 minutes. God knows what it was like at peak times. I eventually got so fed up that I'd go cross-country for a couple of junctions, just to keep moving.

Even when I've managed to miss all the traffic by leaving very early or late, I'm still stuck at 50mph in L1, by myself, with no sign of workers behind their concrete barriers :fuelfire:

So yes, I do tend to put my foot down a little when I'm out of these average speed camera zones.

I would of course welcome the option of using public transport, but even on my worst days driving, I still manage to get into the office (by Brentford) in less time than using the train - and it also doesn't cost me £318 for a standard open ticket; or £90 for an off-peak ticket if the boss would let me turn up at 1PM and leave by 1PM; or if I spent more cash on a hotel for Sunday night & Friday night I could also use an off-peak ticket, but then what's the point of going home for 1 night. It would also mean 3 train changes (Liverpool to Euston, 2 tubes, then a bus).
 
original guvnor said:
petach said:
original guvnor said:
Most of the EU has a 130km/h limit on motorways. Funny that we have been so enthusiastic adopting other EU-wide directives/legislation etc but choose not to adopt that one.
Click to expand...

The UK (at last count) had 31 deaths per 1 million population. All other European countries had higher death rates. Most were 40-59 deaths per 1 million and some over 80 per 1 million. People may say there are lies, damned lies and statistics. But what else is there to prove a point?
Click to expand...

But are you looking at motorway casualty rates or all roads? I'm talking about motorway speed limits. If we set all road speed limits to 20mph we'll have the safest roads in the world but at what cost to our society as a whole? Yes death and serious injury will be very low but so will our productivity too. The point being that road safety is not the only consideration to take into account when setting speed limits. And we have a productivity issue compared to our EU rivals.
Click to expand...


In 2016, about 8 % of road deaths took place on motorways; 37 % in urban areas; the majority (55 %) happened in rural areas.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom