Safe Speed Forums

The campaign for genuine road safety
It is currently Fri Mar 29, 2024 11:10

All times are UTC [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 93 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Wed Jan 09, 2008 22:11 
Offline
User

Joined: Sun Oct 07, 2007 19:58
Posts: 730
Apparently it is generally accepted that drivers with advanced skills are able to drive faster and safer than other "ordinary" drivers who do not have the same level of skills.

So the speed limits are not designed for the drivers who are more highly trained, they are designed for the drivers who are not quite so well trained who are unaware of their own stopping distances, of how to gauge how another driver will react, are not so hot on hazard recognition, who are not as good at reading the road.

This means that there must be a large number of drivers out there who are not very able as drivers. Yet who cannot be trusted not to floor it and drive everywhere at 70mph+. The speed limits are intended to keep them driving at a speed more in line with their ability.

There is, however, a better way of dealing with this problem. Better training for drivers. And training and tests that take place -in part- on private areas that teach and test ability to handle skids, wet weather driving and so forth.

And if there are drivers who cannot or will not follow sensible rules (for example, do NOT drive at 29mph on hard packed ice in a 30mph area) then don't let them drive.

This would cost more, sure. But what does the government want? Cheapness or effective driver training and less accidents?

Cheapness, probably... :roll:

_________________
www.thatsnews.org.uk / www.thatsnews.blogspot.com / http://thatsmotoring.blogspot.com/


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jan 09, 2008 22:14 
Offline
Gold Member
Gold Member

Joined: Fri Sep 24, 2004 23:26
Posts: 9263
Location: Treacletown ( just north of M6 J3),A MILE OR TWO PAST BEDROCK
Thatsnews wrote:

But what does the government want? Cheapness or effective driver training and less accidents?

Cheapness, probably... :roll:


No - they want money .(As the song says ) Money: Lots of money :o

_________________
lets bring sanity back to speed limits.
Drivers are like donkeys -they respond best to a carrot, not a stick .Road safety experts are like Asses - best kept covered up ,or sat on


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jan 09, 2008 22:17 
Offline
User

Joined: Sun Oct 07, 2007 19:58
Posts: 730
botach wrote:
Thatsnews wrote:

But what does the government want? Cheapness or effective driver training and less accidents?

Cheapness, probably... :roll:


No - they want money .(As the song says ) Money: Lots of money :o


Yes. That, too! :D

_________________
www.thatsnews.org.uk / www.thatsnews.blogspot.com / http://thatsmotoring.blogspot.com/


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Jan 09, 2008 23:41 
Offline
Life Member
Life Member
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jul 03, 2006 22:31
Posts: 407
Location: A Safe Distance From Others
It's the old "there for the guidance of wise men, and the blind compliance of fools".

Unfortunately, there are far too many of the latter and too few of the former on the roads these days. Which ties in nicely with Paul's core argument of skills, attitudes, and the detrimental effect thereof of current road safety policy.

_________________
Simon


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Jan 10, 2008 00:36 
Offline
User

Joined: Sun Oct 07, 2007 19:58
Posts: 730
SigmaMotion wrote:
It's the old "there for the guidance of wise men, and the blind compliance of fools".

Unfortunately, there are far too many of the latter and too few of the former on the roads these days. Which ties in nicely with Paul's core argument of skills, attitudes, and the detrimental effect thereof of current road safety policy.


Indeed, yes.

And the ability of some police officers seems to be lacking.

A friend was driving safely, at speed on an NSL road. It was clear of all traffic. She was driving at about 80-90mph.

A police car pulled her over. The police officer shouted: "Do you know how fast I had to drive to catch up with you?"

She replied: "No, officer, I don't. Surely that depends on where you started from?"

He did ask a bit of a dumb question, didn't he? :D

There were no charges, so presumably his car was only a patrol car and might not have had a calibrated speedometer.

_________________
www.thatsnews.org.uk / www.thatsnews.blogspot.com / http://thatsmotoring.blogspot.com/


Last edited by Thatsnews on Thu Jan 10, 2008 01:52, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Jan 10, 2008 01:21 
Offline
Life Member
Life Member

Joined: Wed Feb 22, 2006 12:30
Posts: 144
Location: Cleveland
Thatsnews wrote:
SigmaMotion wrote:
It's the old "there for the guidance of wise men, and the blind compliance of fools".

Unfortunately, there are far too many of the latter and too few of the former on the roads these days. Which ties in nicely with Paul's core argument of skills, attitudes, and the detrimental effect thereof of current road safety policy.


Indeed, yes.

And the ability of some police officers seems to be lacking.

A friend was driving safely, at speed on an NSL road. It was clear of all traffic. She was driving at about 80-90mph.

A police car pulled her over. The police officer shouted: "Do you know how fast I had to drive to catch up with you?"

She replied: "No, officer, I don't. Surely that depends on where you started from?"

He did as a bit of a dumb question, didn't he? :D

There were no charges, so presumably his car was only a patrol car and might not have had a calibrated speedometer.


Might be wise to educate your friend on how to spot police cars in future.

_________________
All views expressed are personal.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Jan 10, 2008 01:57 
Offline
User

Joined: Sun Oct 07, 2007 19:58
Posts: 730
ipsg.glf wrote:
Thatsnews wrote:
SigmaMotion wrote:
It's the old "there for the guidance of wise men, and the blind compliance of fools".

Unfortunately, there are far too many of the latter and too few of the former on the roads these days. Which ties in nicely with Paul's core argument of skills, attitudes, and the detrimental effect thereof of current road safety policy.


Indeed, yes.

And the ability of some police officers seems to be lacking.

A friend was driving safely, at speed on an NSL road. It was clear of all traffic. She was driving at about 80-90mph.

A police car pulled her over. The police officer shouted: "Do you know how fast I had to drive to catch up with you?"

She replied: "No, officer, I don't. Surely that depends on where you started from?"

He did as a bit of a dumb question, didn't he? :D

There were no charges, so presumably his car was only a patrol car and might not have had a calibrated speedometer.


Might be wise to educate your friend on how to spot police cars in future.


Thinking back on it we think he must have REALLY being caning his patrol car. His speed must have been at about 100mph, or perhaps a bit more. And he was NOT using his blue light until just before he pulled us over.

But this is the area were one of his colleagues thought it fun to drive a high performance car (without permission) through the narrow streets of a nearby housing estate at 100mph plus. Just for a bit of a lark. Having abandoned the duties he was PAID to do that night...

_________________
www.thatsnews.org.uk / www.thatsnews.blogspot.com / http://thatsmotoring.blogspot.com/


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jan 11, 2008 19:43 
Offline
User

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2007 17:12
Posts: 618
Location: Borough of Queens, NYC, NY USA
Why are there speed limits?
For me to poop on.
I apologize if that was in bad taste, but seriously ...
No good driver relies on their speedometer, or a speed limit sign, except when distracted by the spectre of revenue generation, aka speed enforcement.
I read somewhere on this website that a speed limit sign serves three purposes: to guide novices, to indicate of what kind of area they are about to drive thru (residential, commercial, school zone, etc.), and I apologize for forgetting the 3rd - and I can't find the page on this website either.

"for the guidance of wise men, and the blind compliance of fools" Golden.
I'm starting to wonder why they're called speed limits. Could you imagine if they were simply called 'posted speeds', or 'reference speeds', or something like that?
Imagine that: guidance bereft of any menace whatsoever.
Or is it too difficult to imagine a society where the 'elected' government isn't experimenting with how much control the general public will accept in their daily lives?

_________________
The Rules for ALL ROAD USERS:
1) No one gets hurt
2) Nothing gets hit, except to protect others; see Rule#1
3) The Laws of Physics are invincible and immutable - so-called 'laws' of men are not
4) You are always immediately and ultimately responsible for your safety first, then proximately responsible for everyone's
Do not let other road users' mistakes become yours, nor yours become others
5) The rest, including laws of the land, is thoughtful observation, prescience, etiquette, decorum, and cooperation


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Jan 13, 2008 00:22 
Offline
Member
Member

Joined: Fri Apr 22, 2005 10:30
Posts: 2053
Location: South Wales (Roving all UK)
I am of the firm belief that speed limits only exist so that the police don't have to go to the trouble of proving a DWDCA cahrge etc etc.....I'm convinced they were intended to be enforced with discretion not by automated devices


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Jan 13, 2008 01:27 
Offline
Member
Member

Joined: Thu Jun 23, 2005 02:50
Posts: 2868
Location: Dorset
If they were purely advisory (but exceeding them could add weight to another offence) then the situation would be a lot better.

_________________
Andrew.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Jan 13, 2008 10:33 
Offline
User

Joined: Sat Oct 20, 2007 22:50
Posts: 3267
Ziltro wrote:
If they were purely advisory (but exceeding them could add weight to another offence) then the situation would be a lot better.


Crash rates would go up, and obviously so would convictions as many people weighed up the risk and decided that it was worth it.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Jan 13, 2008 11:14 
Offline
Gold Member
Gold Member
User avatar

Joined: Sat Mar 06, 2004 22:35
Posts: 643
Location: South Wales
weepej wrote:
Ziltro wrote:
If they were purely advisory (but exceeding them could add weight to another offence) then the situation would be a lot better.


Crash rates would go up, and obviously so would convictions as many people weighed up the risk and decided that it was worth it.


On what do you base that assertion?

_________________
It is difficult to get a man to understand something when his job depends on not understanding it.

Upton Sinclair


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Jan 13, 2008 11:49 
Offline
User

Joined: Sat Oct 20, 2007 22:50
Posts: 3267
gopher wrote:
On what do you base that assertion?


That reducing speeds on roads invariably leads to less crashes, and less severe crashes.

That we have speed limits at all is proof of this.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Jan 13, 2008 13:16 
Offline
Friend of Safe Speed
Friend of Safe Speed

Joined: Sat Mar 06, 2004 12:01
Posts: 4813
Location: Essex
weepej wrote:
gopher wrote:
On what do you base that [if speed limits were purely advisory (but exceeding them could add weight to another offence) crash rates *would* go up as would convictions] assertion?


That reducing speeds on roads invariably leads to less crashes, and less severe crashes.

That we have speed limits at all is proof of this.


I disagree. When the speed limit, for whatever reason, is higher than the speed at which you feel comfortable driving at, do you "chance it"? I should hope not. I don't, and I'm very confident that, with the exception of emergency situations where the trade-off may be life saving, none of the people advocating advisory speed limits here would "chance it" either.

The message that travelling over the speed is limit is invariably dangerous can lead, very wrongly, but entirely understandably to the uninitiated, to the conclusion that travelling up to the speed limit is therefore safe.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Jan 13, 2008 13:41 
Offline
User

Joined: Sat Oct 20, 2007 22:50
Posts: 3267
Roger wrote:
The message that travelling over the speed is limit is invariably dangerous can lead, very wrongly, but entirely understandably to the uninitiated, to the conclusion that travelling up to the speed limit is therefore safe.


Well, you know I don't consider any speed to be safe.

I guess that's why the name "Safe Speed" irks me so.

You really believe that given the option to travel at what speed they like less than 90% of people in a hurry wouldn't travel a bit faster than somebody in less of a hurry would feel comfortable with, i.e. push the appropriate speed a bit, or even a lot?


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Jan 13, 2008 17:48 
Offline
Friend of Safe Speed
Friend of Safe Speed
User avatar

Joined: Tue Mar 09, 2004 23:09
Posts: 6735
Location: Stockport, Cheshire
civil engineer wrote:
I am of the firm belief that speed limits only exist so that the police don't have to go to the trouble of proving a DWDCA cahrge etc etc.....I'm convinced they were intended to be enforced with discretion not by automated devices

Yes, as I've said before, speed limits provide a means of prosecuting unsafe driving, they do not define unsafe driving - as many seem to think nowadays.

Ziltro wrote:
If they were purely advisory (but exceeding them could add weight to another offence) then the situation would be a lot better.

But that would either end up with speed limits in effect being set by legal precedent (someone was convicted of DWDC&A down here by doing 39 mph a few years back) or with effectively giving carte blanche to nutters.

The principle of speed limits is fine - the problem is obsessive mass enforcement and ratcheting them down to ludicrously low levels.

_________________
"Show me someone who says that they have never exceeded a speed limit, and I'll show you a liar, or a menace." (Austin Williams - Director, Transport Research Group)

Any views expressed in this post are personal opinions and may not represent the views of Safe Speed


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Sun Jan 13, 2008 18:18 
Offline
User

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2007 17:12
Posts: 618
Location: Borough of Queens, NYC, NY USA
"there for the guidance of wise men, and the blind compliance of fools."

I will disable my speedometer for a week. Anyone besides weepej want to bet that I'll meet my demise, or experience any sort of damage whatsoever?
In fact, I'll even bet that I won't even get a speeding ticket, despite my tendency to set and keep a pace at the speed limit +10 to 15 MpH whenever possible.
(No speed cameras in NYS, but cops here enforce speed limits by adding 13MpH to what's posted, no further questions.)

Someone PLEASE make me a millionaire ...

"You really believe that given the option to travel at what speed they like less than 90% of people in a hurry wouldn't travel a bit faster than somebody in less of a hurry would feel comfortable with, i.e. push the appropriate speed a bit, or even a lot?" Whenever traffic physically permits, my personal driving style makes 90% of people feel uncomfortable, and my professional driving style gets me one complaint a week, and one request a day.

_________________
The Rules for ALL ROAD USERS:
1) No one gets hurt
2) Nothing gets hit, except to protect others; see Rule#1
3) The Laws of Physics are invincible and immutable - so-called 'laws' of men are not
4) You are always immediately and ultimately responsible for your safety first, then proximately responsible for everyone's
Do not let other road users' mistakes become yours, nor yours become others
5) The rest, including laws of the land, is thoughtful observation, prescience, etiquette, decorum, and cooperation


Last edited by The Rush on Sun Jan 13, 2008 18:31, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Sun Jan 13, 2008 18:23 
Offline
User

Joined: Sat Oct 20, 2007 22:50
Posts: 3267
The Rush wrote:
despite my tendency to set and keep a pace at the speed limit +10 to 15 MpH whenever possible.


Be careful there, I got seriously lambasted recently for suggesting people do this (speed limit + a bit), I even got told I was simply "wrong".


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Sun Jan 13, 2008 18:26 
Offline
Friend of Safe Speed
Friend of Safe Speed
User avatar

Joined: Tue Mar 09, 2004 23:09
Posts: 6735
Location: Stockport, Cheshire
weepej wrote:
The Rush wrote:
despite my tendency to set and keep a pace at the speed limit +10 to 15 MpH whenever possible.

Be careful there, I got seriously lambasted recently for suggesting people do this (speed limit + a bit), I even got told I was simply "wrong".

This may have some truth on motorways and similar roads, on any other type of road it is, as you say, simply wrong.

Do most drivers do 70-75 mph on single-carriageway NSL A-roads? Or 40-45 mph on residential streets? I don't think so...

_________________
"Show me someone who says that they have never exceeded a speed limit, and I'll show you a liar, or a menace." (Austin Williams - Director, Transport Research Group)

Any views expressed in this post are personal opinions and may not represent the views of Safe Speed


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Sun Jan 13, 2008 18:29 
Offline
User

Joined: Sat Oct 20, 2007 22:50
Posts: 3267
PeterE wrote:
Do most drivers do 70-75 mph on single-carriageway NSL A-roads? Or 40-45 mph on residential streets? I don't think so...


No, I suggested most drivers drive at a speed that the feel they can get back to a speed where they feel they would be over looked if spotted at that speed.

That's about 36 in a 30 by my reckoning (30 + 3 + 3).


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 93 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next

All times are UTC [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 7 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You can post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
[ Time : 0.035s | 13 Queries | GZIP : Off ]