Safe Speed Forums

Oh, I like it, lots and lots and lots

Seriously though, I think the protest speed should be slower - like 40, just so basingwerk can come along and feel right at home
(P.C. N.B. - No offence intended basingwerk, I wouldn't want you to be upset by my flippant comment )

_________________
"Are you sh**ing me?"
"John Spartan, you are fined one credit for a violation of the verbal morality statute."

If you're one of those people who posted above stating that this is not called for and many other things...

Don't you think it's telling that for years, people mostly grudgeingly put up with most cameras... but now, there is protest triggered by this new move on the M4??

People have accepted that speed needs to be controlled in urban areas, somtimes they don't agree with the posted limits, somtimes those limits are too high, other times they are too low.... but endless and untimately mind numbing talk about how speed kills... is not going to help...

I can drive at 30mph past a school with children running left right and centre... and yet only a little bit more than twice as fast on a 3 or 4 lane, perfectly streight and sometimes deserted streach of tarmac which may be streight for hundreds of miles??

If people are to respect speed limits, they have to be set at a reasonable level... By all means, crucify somone for driving past a busy school gate at 50mph at 9am...but what about 3am?? and why have 3 lane dual carrageways with 30 and 40Mph speed limits?? Driving at that speed on such a road is actually quite stressful simply because the speed limit is set incorrectly, and this is where cameras are placed... seemingly to catch somone who, god forbid, has been paying attention to the road ahead rather than their speedometer.

I for one think that blind enforcement of the letter of the law is wrong in most instances... speed is no exception, and that is what a camera does.... On some days it may only be safe to do 50mph or less on a motorway due to fog or poor weather... and on other days, it is perfectly safe to do 100mph... the camera won't catch somone doing 70Mph in thick fog where they are a danger, but will catch them doing 75 when it is clear and the road deserted...

It's all about respect, if the speed limits respect the drivers, then the drivers will respect the speed limits...

BlueAdept - I agree completely, especially about idiots speeding when foggy. Cameras do not catch this type of lunacy, wheras a trafpol will.

_________________
"Are you sh**ing me?"
"John Spartan, you are fined one credit for a violation of the verbal morality statute."

Fact: 70mph limit on motorways is the law.
Drive within this and you wont get caught and fined, or take the train.
Stop causing disruption to law abiding motorists going about their business in the normal way on Saturday 30th and get on with your lives
Lets hope the police out wit you!

The problem you clearly fail to understand is that we will be obeying the law at 56 mph

Its nothing whatsoever to do with the 70 mph limit, its to do with the revenue based enforcement that should clearly be carried out by experienced traffic officers appropriately for the road conditions.

Does a camera catch someone doing 70 mph in a rain storm when the maximum safe speed would be more like 50 mph? I think not.

Does a camera catch someone tailgating, talking on a mobile phone or performing a dangerous manouver - again, I think not.

That is why we need traffic police, not revenue robots.

_________________
"Are you sh**ing me?"
"John Spartan, you are fined one credit for a violation of the verbal morality statute."

Agree we should have more traffic police to enforce both the speed limit and stop people driving dangerously or in cars without tax or MOT or drunkards etc.
But why are you protesting - because whilst you might be safe drivers you want to drive faster than the speed limit and break the law thats why. You cant accept the 70mph limit. Cant understand what the problem is, I have no concern about these cameras because I dont break the law by speeding (nor do I drive dangerously or when I am drunk for the record)

Hi there - I just joined and really only to make this point....


I took my test a year ago and since then I have never had a fine for speeding, All I have had to do to avoid this is drive within the legal speed limit as indicated by the road signs. Is it really that difficult for people to keep within the speed limit? I find it incredible that people seem to believe that they are 'caught out' or that the fines are the result of cameras when surely it is pretty obvious that the fines received are the result of the speeding itself.

_________________
freedom is knowledge of one's necessity

And infact 56 mph is the best speed to travel at for most effective fuel consumption so I am told, so why not drive at between 56 mph and 70mph during your usual life instead of just on the one day?

_________________
freedom is knowledge of one's necessity

Okay, just to nail my colours to the flag. I'm not anti-speed cameras. I think they perform a valuable role as a revenue raiser and (in certain cases) safety devices. I don't support Safespeed on a lot of their aims, but I do agree with their opinion on traffic police numbers being increased. Which is where the revenue could be spent!

Anyway, that wasn't really my point. I just wanted to ask if there is going to be any way that the Public at large will be able to differentiate between the two Militant Motorist groups (Anti-speed Cameratis, and Fuel Protesters) that seem to be on the verge of protesting at the same time?

Just a thought really.

Fact: I am a normal motorist, who has never once had a speeding (or even parking) ticket, neither have I ever damaged a car I was driving. I concider myself to be one of the most law abiding people I know, and I am here not because I want to see the cameras removed so that everyone can excede the speed limit, but because they are often placed in such a way that normal motorists have to continually monitor speed rather than look out for hazards...

Noone in their right mind has to monitor their speed past a school gate, at 9am, or through other "high risk" areas... because it is natural to take care... cameras here would only catch the truely dangerous motorists... but there are no cameras, because they would not be economical...

Of course, catching 100's of people doing 75-80 on the M4 in ideal conditions IS economical... even if it has no actual safety benefit.... Cameras used like this only cause resentment and disrespect for the limits.

A collegue of mine was stopped doing about that sort of speed once, and told by an actual traffic policeman that since that streach of road was unlit, it seemed unlikley that he could see far enough ahead to be safe... I doubt he will forget that advice, and has passed it on... but a ticket and a fine would have just caused resentment.

This campain is clearly about the mis-use of speed cameras... not about the setting of speed limits, that is another issue that does need to be addressed... but it is not what the issue here is.

On that subject, I would certainly vote to have the motorway speed limits increased marginally... and indeed more than 50% of all motorists demonstrate that they would also do... every day.... but I might also be happy to have lower, or more strictly enforced limits in genuinely high risk areas...

In germany for example, the average speed on unlimited Autobahn's is only 5Mph higher than here, with an excelent safety record.... wow, drivers using their own judgement to set their speed safely, and it's almost exactly the same speed as many people travel at here...

Noone here is keen to cause hugh disruption, but it is the way of the world today.... if you don't present yourself to be seen and counted, you will continually be downtrodden and ignored... or worse, exploited... (Oh wait!... ).
Safe Speed, and the ABD have been campaining for years on this issue... but guess what, now it's news!

So it is OK to encourage the penal system, by turning it into a fund raising system?? This can only lead to a system where safety is second to the fund raising.

If you must raise funds, TAX people... but have you any idea how much money is already raised from motorists?

£700m is a drop in the ocean... road tax alone is approximately 10bn and fuel tax is 10 times more! I encourage you to do the maths...

byny said:


Exactly the same as me, untill i was caught doing 70 mph in a 50, the road had been recently reduced without my knowledge, i had not one leg to stand on, the road is good enough to be a national limit but had been reduced to 50 mph with the simple reason being that they wanted to catch people like me, i simply drove to the conditions and was punished. i had no reason to believe the road was other than a national limit, it was a long wide open dual carriageway at 70mph for years prior,

i'm afraid to say that my case is similar to many many other drivers. how can this be road safety if the mobile vans are hiding? i did not notice them, i thought the idea was to 'slow people down' obviously not, how is this dealing with the problem?

They then publicly vent their 'disapointment' in catching thousands of motorists exceeding the limit - how about putting signs up for starters?

some one in government etc has thieir priorities wrong for the simple reason of making money,

anyway i'm off to the ECHR soon to put an end to all this madness

cheers,
matt

monitoring your speed is just one of many things a driver has to do - it's not difficult, it's not dangerous...I do it every journey I make with complete success. The only reason monitoring your speed is dangerous is if you are over the speed limit and then suddenly breaking, if you are doing what you are supposed to then there is no need for any driver to behave dangerously!

_________________
freedom is knowledge of one's necessity

Fair point. Rename them tax cameras and plough all the revenue into proper saftey measures like Traffic Police then.



£700m + £10bn + £100bn = £110 007 000 000 (if we're talking a Billion being 9 zeros).

I've never really bought the stereotypical beleaguered motorist thing. There are too many factors to consider, as well as the road maintenance side of things there's impact on health, society and environment to consider. Many of these are so difficult to put a price on because we're not even sure what the impact may be yet!

But back to the point £700m could buy a lot of traffic police.

but it is your responsibility as a driver to look at the signs and there would have been a sign indicating the drop in speed limit, so your fault not theirs!

_________________
freedom is knowledge of one's necessity

It is my responsibility byny, to drive safely i agree, so why is it that all of a sudden a 50mph limit is required? what is wrong with 70mph as it was before? it wasn't dangerous as you would suggest,

I was punished for driving safely which involved watching the road ahead, i don't believe I should be looking out for 50 signs as i have mentioned it was a National Limit for years prior.

Cheers,
matt

That would depend on the Drag co-effeciancy of your vehicle, also the type of vehicle.

_________________
Regards
M-Jay

If you have never gone even 1mph over the speed limit, then you are entitled to make a comment like that.

_________________
Regards
M-Jay

Afternoon all,

Just registered to show my support for the protest and to let you know I will be attending.

Also to let you know, I will be coming with about 20 other people from Perfomance car clubs (NOT CRUISERS I MIGHT ADD THERE) but car enthusiasts.

_________________
Regards
M-Jay