Safe Speed Forums

http://www.itv-motoring.com/news/2006/january/23/7886.asp




Maybe they are looking for cameras

I think the rest of the Volvo blurb is rubbish though.

_________________
Speed camera policy Kills

Would be good to get hold of the source data.

Driver inattentiveness is heightened by boredom caused by being forced to cruise 100s of miles along lightly trafficed motorways at below the natural and safe speed. M6 and A74(M) spring to mind as do fairly remote stretches of the M4 and M180.

..

_________________
Q. Are you a stupid fascist with limited reading skills or are you just a retard?

I don't know if anyone watched "Child of our time" on BBC1 tonight.
There was footage of a police driver doing a slalom course between a line of cones - he had been trained to do this, and completed the course in very good time. A special camera showed that his eyes were focused on the cones as he negotiated the course.
Robert Winston (in the car with him) asked him to drive the course again, but, this time, to simultaneously do a mental calculation consisting of repeatedly subtracting 30 from 1000, and saying the results out loud. This time, he just managed to (badly) make it around the first three cones before losing control of the car - and the camera showed that his eyes were everywhere but focused on the cones.
Winston then remarked that the experiment showed exactly where the danger lies of using a mobile phone whilst driving.

_________________
Only when ideology, prejudice and dogma are set aside does the truth emerge - Kepler

But I read on here that the mobile phone test results were either fixed or mis-interpreted?

Yes. This showed only too plainly that the danger is primarily down to distraction.
But the law says that you're not allowed to use a handheld mobile - even when stopped in a traffic jam. However, you're allowed to us a handsfree mobile at any time.
The danger is not from the physical act of holding the phone - so if the lawmakers didn't misinterpret the studies, or the studies weren't biased, then what happened?

_________________
Only when ideology, prejudice and dogma are set aside does the truth emerge - Kepler

Or watching your GPS display. I saw that program too. To my mind GPS, despite its benefits is equally bad as a distraction as using a mobile. Trouble is I can't convince most people that GPS screens are a potential hazard.

I have no difficulty in accepting that they are a potential hazard but that is not to say they are going to amount to an actual hazard. It entirely depends on how we use them, as it does with so many things, including cars themselves!.

On balance I think sat. nav. systems make me safer when navigating in unfamiliar areas. It's a jolly sight better than trying to read a map and drive at the same time. I know we shouldn't try to read maps while driving, but in some situations (inner city areas etc.) it can sometimes be difficult to find a suitable place to stop for map reading purposes.

Best wishes all,
Dave.

It seems like nobody is enforcing - certainly nobody seems to worry about being caught - last year I saw somebody at the junction in Kendal which leads to the police station, and saw a woman in the box junction on her phone!!
This morning I got tailgated for some distance by this 4 wheel drive...

You can see the "Safety" cameras in the background and the phone at the ear!!!!

_________________
Time to take responsibility for our actions.. and don't be afraid of speaking out!

I get depressed when I see statistics like this.
It's so bloody obvious.
If we all give sufficient attention to the task of driving, accidents will be virtually eliminated because we will see the risks and react accordingly.
We don't run into things on purpose, do we?
So road safety initiatives should focus on helping drivers learn how to remain attentive, assess risks and implement appropriate action.
No need for speed limits.
The depressing thing is that no matter how obvious this is, or how much data there is to support it, we seem to make no headway against the "speed kills" logic.
Moan over - but still depressed.

There is no 'natural' speed. Anything above running speed is unnatural. The road safety agency have decided a speed limit based on tens of thousands of accidents and hundreds of thousands of hours of work, why do you think you should be allowed to break the law and drive too fast?
If you want to speed, take up racing driving, nobody's stopping you.

Actually most speed limits have been set by observing the 'natural' speed of traffic... It's normally called the '85th percentile rule'. Look it up.

_________________
Paul Smith
Our scrap speed cameras petition got over 28,000 sigs
The Safe Speed campaign demands a return to intelligent road safety

But not our national limits - therin lies the problem...

Part of the problem anyway.

_________________
Paul Smith
Our scrap speed cameras petition got over 28,000 sigs
The Safe Speed campaign demands a return to intelligent road safety

I know how to help drivers to 'remain attentive' - threaten them with prison if they break the law.
You'll find that normally works.
That and five yearly driving tests.

No, such a ridiculous idea, aren't they?


Yes, it must be really 'depressing' not being able to drive like a maniac everywhere, with no regard for other people's LIVES, without getting done for it.

Now, could YOU explain to me WHY you want to speed all the time? Can't you see there's something WRONG with you?
Why would you feel the need to speed? If all speed limits were 5mph, all over the country, I could understand it, but they aren't, so what exactly is it that's driving you to drive dangerously? (I know, you're not 'dangerous', it's too hard to read the speedo, it's more important to be attentive, etc. Can't you do ALL of the above while driving? I thought that was part of passing the test. I manage to do them all with consummate ease...)

So in other words, there were no speed limits on MOST roads before they had a speed limit? (That's exactly what you've just said).
Speed limits are set (correct me if I'm wrong) according to the road and environment: if there is a pavement and street lights, it is 30mph, because there is a likelihood of pedestrians. Outside schools it can be 20mph or less. Why is this? Should we get rid of speed limits outside schools? If not, why not? Should anybody be allowed to decide what speed they wish to drive outside a primary school? If not, why not?
Do you see what I'm getting at?

Why do you want to speed so much? Why don't you take up Formula 1 and get it out of your system, without risking other people's lives?

I don't know why I'm replying to a troll, but I will - just this one time!

No, before 1965 there were no rural speed limits. There was only a 30 urban limit where street lights were 200 yards apart or less!

And to answer your question from another thread, when I passed my test at 17 I did NOT sign up for draconian limits imposed on us by non-driving councillors and 'traffic engineers' straight out of school!

Can you tell me why you feel the urge to drive quickly, so badly? I'm genuinely interested. I never feel like the speed limit is too slow. Why are they 'draconian'? Why wouldn't traffic engineers know more about a long stretch of road, its history, gradients, accident rate, pedestrian traffic, etc. than 99% of the motorists who use it?
And why are people being called 'trolls' merely for disagreeing with the basic beliefs of this site?

A "troll" is someone who posts on a forum to be deliberately mishcievous and provocative. Personally, I positively welcome views from the "other side". I WANT to understand what makes people believe that if everyone sticks to the speed limits (which, I hope you now understand, WERE set arbitrarily!) we'd all be fine. I started out on the old CSCP forum being pretty agnostic about speed cameras - I have a clean licence, don't use a camear dectector and drive well above the average mileage each year. Gradually, I saw the arguments from the camera partnership and those from "this" side and I ws persuaded by those from this side. If you can supply REASONED arguments backed up with FACTS as to why cameras are so good, I'm always willing to listen but I have to say that the emotive language and "hype" I've seen so far just smacks of the "Speed kills....because we say so" arguments that we've seen so many times before!