Safe Speed Forums

safetyman, please explain how the speed limit tells you how far you can see to stop in. I would have been dead years ago if I followed the numbers on sticks. Personally I prefer to look at the road ahead and adjust my speed accordingly. I live in a rural area with lots of NSL on roads where 15mph is plenty fast enough. Equally we have rigidly enforced 50mph limits on roads that are so straight (lines of old Roman roads) that you could do 100mph and still safely stop in the distance you can see. What have speed limits got to do with safety in these cases?

...which is the same as saying:


...which is the same as saying:


So, forget skill, attitude, experience or anything remotely subtle or complex; as long as you obey the rules then you'll be fine. That's what "safetyman" is saying, is it not? That it's as simple as that?

The more I read "safetyman"'s posts, the more I realise just what a bad way UK road safety is in, and just how unbelievably wide of the mark the attitudes of the authorities are. Just like everyone else, I knew it was bad; but I never dared believe it was as bad as this. People like "safetyman" actually seem to think that it's all about rule adherance; they're not just pretending for political gain. It really is astonishing. I'm speechless. How can people be so incredibly blinkered after all this time?

It's too depressing for words. My but it's an uphill struggle to make some people realise the truth. I don't know how Paul finds the will to persevere, but I'm awfully glad that he does. This has to be sorted out before we get unmitigated carnage. "safetyman", please open your mind pronto before we get a bloodbath. I beg you, forget your preconceptions and take in the pages of this site in good faith; you'll realise that they make so much more sense than your current standpoint. Do it now. This weekend.

Please.

_________________
Paul Smith: a legend.

"The freedom provided by the motor vehicle is not universally applauded, however: there are those who resent the loss of state control over individual choice that the car represents. Such people rarely admit their prejudices openly; instead, they make false or exaggerated claims about the adverse effects of road transport in order to justify calls for higher taxation or restrictions on mobility." (Conservative Way Forward: Stop The War Against Drivers)

Yeah. Couple that with this:



The gap between what we have achieved (red data line) and that which we should reasonably expected to have achieved (centre of the yellow band) and you find that around 10,000 have died to date of the effect.

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

I ahve never been flashed!! that proves to me that it is not the person who sets out to stick to the limit that has to worry as, as we all know the cameras are not set at an exact speed of 30 mph but some discretion is allowed.

Now a look at your own web site the "help Im been prosicuted section will indicate that speeds of 10-25 mph over the limit do (rightly!) attract attention.

The reason I Love safety cameras is that they keep me safe but catch those who are intent on putting my safety and those of others at risk and for what??
to be two or three seconds faster to work, the shops !!!

And if you believe that, you'll believe anything

How do you know you've never been flashed? Do you always watch gatsos in your mirror after you've passed them.
Also, I've never been, or noticed being, flashed. So what does that prove?

_________________
Views expressed are personal opinions and are not necessarily shared by the Safe Speed campaign

Well done you, join the club... I think you'll find there are plenty of us who've never been flashed, even though we don't subscribe to the simplistic "speed kills" concept of road safety. I think you'll also find there are plenty of drivers out there who've also never been flashed, but are amongst some of the most dangerous drivers currently on the roads, and I don't just mean the idiots who use genuinely inappropriate speeds inbetween the cameras - there's a growing number of numpties who think bimbling around under the limit is enough to make them safe drivers, and so such niceties as lane discipline, indicating, use of mirrors, correct use of headlights/foglights, basic vehicle maintenance and upkeep etc. etc. get completely ignored.

Do you really want to share the roads with people driving around on tyres that look like racing slicks, with one headlight completely out and the other so badly aligned it seems to be impersonating an anti-aircraft searchlight, who don't bother with the MS... part of MSM before changing lanes right in front of you (or in some cases, attempting to change lanes whilst still alongside you), but who - measured on the "speed kills" metric - appear to be the safest of the safe because they never get near the speed limit let alone exceed it? I don't.




Indeed, some even allow you to be doing at least 45mph along a stretch of NSL motorway before generating a NIP, and then there's the ones who just flash away indiscriminately because they've buggered up (like the Redpeed I saw on the A40 in East Acton a week or two ago - flashing away every couple of seconds, and being digital it wouldn't even be wasting film ) - given that we know SCPs don't always bother to check the secondary markings on the photos before dishing out the NIPs, I wonder just how many people have been falsely accused of speeding (and even worse, have then just accepted their penalty on the assumption that the camera must be right) in such cases...




How many of your beloved cameras are able to catch the people I described above? Here's a subtle clue. NONE OF THEM. Camera van operators might argue that they can report vehicles which aren't speeding but which still deserve police attention, but every single one of us can report vehicles deserving of police attention (and some of us, myself included, have already done so) - doesn't mean anything will actually get done though.

_________________
Chris

I believe they do this for testing. The trigger speed can be set remotely and as there is no film they aren't wasting anything, so they can afford to take photos of vehicles which they can't prosecute.

Of course then there are Gatsos, which love lorries.

_________________
Andrew.

Really? Then perhaps someone needs to visit the LSCP offices carrying a large cluestick and attempt to beat some sense into the idiots there (I know it won't be easy, you'd first need to beat some brains into them so there'd then be somewhere for the sense to go). This one was flashing away during one of the busier periods, and every time it flashed you got waves of panic/pavlovian braking, which was doing utterly no good at all to the traffic flow through the junction the camera was supposedly protecting... It was also bloody distracting for anyone travelling towards the camera - having a scamera double-flash you head on once after sunset is bad enough, but to have one repeatedly doing so makes for a less than pleasant experience. Still, it's all in the name of safety, so it must be OK

_________________
Chris

No. Cameras tell you nothing about safety. They simply keep you below a posted limit. With an attitude like yours I fear for the passengers of your vehicle on the day you continue to drive at that posted limit past an ineffective camera while rounding a bend on a freezing, foggy day.

Your ignorance is shining like a light here, and your blinkered thinking is contributory to the deaths that we are not preventing because of flawed policy. You, sir, have blood on your hands.

Please try to keep it civil.

I realise it is a heated topic and that depths of thought berfore pontification from some quarters are believed to be very shallow, but try not to sling mud. It helps neither the cause, the debate, nor helps to encourage those whose thoughts are believed to be shallow to consider thinking deeper.

Now what harm would sticking to the limit and not above actually cause??

To do this reliably - no exceptions - requires either a significan inset (ie travelling at, say, 22 ish mph gratuitously in a 30 etc) or an inordinate devotion of concentration to the speedometer.

In the former case, the harm done is a lot of lost time - and not just for the person dragging his heels, but all those behind affected, and no doubt frustrated, possibly to the point of precipitating some terrible driving and corresponding accidents.

In the case of the latter, the individual may well miss hazards that would have otherwise been seen and abated. This is seriously worrying.

In either/both cases, in areas where safe progress could reasonably be made at a speed significantly above the posted limit (but for the existence/enforcement of the limit if you see what I mean), the driver is distracted to the point of believing that concentration can lapse below the norm. This is very dangerous, as in reality, concentration has to not lapse for other reasons (fatigue, fastards behind etc).

In itself, none. Unfortunately, as Roger has already pointed out to you yet you didn't acknowledge (and I reminded you of it, again with no acknowledgement), there is the issue of becoming dependent on a number on a post.

Speed limits are being lowered beyond reason, to the point where drivers just rely on the sign so becoming accustomed to not using their own judgement. Divinity help them and those around them come the inevitable occurrence when they really do need to use their judgement.

As I said - sticking rigidly to a posted limit on an icy day in conditions of poor visibility could cause grievous harm if that limit is above the safe speed for the conditions.

If you cannot see or acknowledge that then you are a fool. I make no apologies for that statement as you are the sort of person who will cause accidents and not understand why because you cannot perceive the consequences of your actions. You are quoting propaganda and hiding behind it. Would you use it defend yourself if the worst were to happen ("I couldn't have caused harm - I was below the limit!!!")?

are you involved within a SCP ??

Another question that will be ducked. And we know why.

_________________
Paul Smith: a legend.

"The freedom provided by the motor vehicle is not universally applauded, however: there are those who resent the loss of state control over individual choice that the car represents. Such people rarely admit their prejudices openly; instead, they make false or exaggerated claims about the adverse effects of road transport in order to justify calls for higher taxation or restrictions on mobility." (Conservative Way Forward: Stop The War Against Drivers)

Hmmm...

I see what you mean. The same level of accuracy and attention to detail gives it away.

_________________
Malcolm W.
The views expressed in this post are personal opinions and do not represent the views of Safespeed.

my only connection with my local scp is trying to get a gatso on my road, the idiots despite a change in the law will only site one AFTER a death or serious injury which seems silly to me.

As for the "taking your eyes off the road to look at the speedo and cause accidents we all know that this is just "blocks"

How have you assessed that your road is dangerous? You admit there have been no serious incidents. How have you determined that a camera would make any difference?

N.B. The answers are not "Because I think everyone is speeding." and "Because I think so." These would just be your opinions and not supported by evidence.

_________________
Malcolm W.
The views expressed in this post are personal opinions and do not represent the views of Safespeed.