Safe Speed Forums

What a great analogy. Perhaps we might call a road without a camera a speed easy!

_________________
CSCP Latin for beginners...
Ticketo ergo sum : I scam therefore I am!

No, incorrect, excessive and inappropriate speed have nothing to do with the posted limit, hence there being a seperate causation of speed in excess of a limit.

It is entirely possible to drive at excessive speed but be well within the posted limit. For example a crowded residential street with parked cars and children playing, limit will be 30, anything over 20 is excessive in this scenario. Same road late at night and deserted, 30 is entirely safe.

No, they are there to record and penalise an offence. The PENALTY is what is supposed to disuade you. Most drivers simply outwit the camera by slowing briefly to well below the limit, then resume driving at whatever speed they deem safe, whether it is above or below the limit posted.

The Plumpton crash was such an example. The speed was excessive for the conditions, but NOT in excess of the posted limit. That excess of speed, inexperienced learner driver, with a full car load led to loss of control - which put the car in the path of an oncoming driver - 80 years of age, having just driven from Aberdeen! Barring that last fact, the driver would simply have had an off and learned a valuable lesson.
Which brings me to your next point...
Not a likely scenario is it - a driver choosing to have a collision rather than avoid it! See the above - the oncoming driver hit an out of control vehicle - not out of choice!!

You make some good points here - but I have added some comment within the quote:

Of course you could still end up with a ticket like the one I got while I was away on holiday. Luckily for me I could prove I was in FRANCE and not KENDAL on the day in question.
Also tonight, I passed through the cameras at Ings (40 mph limit) without setting off the camera... but the driver behind got flashed - and he did NOT run into the back of me, so how come he got flashed?
He MIGHT not get a ticket, but I'll lay odds he brakes to pass the camera next time!!

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

A very true statement indeed, and with most crashes ocurring within the speed limits your statement proves it so.



I can empathise with the notion youre attempting to impart to others with this statement Odin, but i think you might wish to change the wording to more accurately reflect reality.
What i mean by that is that the numerical speed of 20 is no more a measure of a safe driving speed than 30 is.
I feel that people are still getting caught up in the numbers game because thats how "danger" seems to be measured these days.
I know it seems like a small point but its definitely relevant when the authorities place so much importance upon "think of a number".

_________________
"Safety" Scamera Partnerships;
Profitting from death and misery since 1993.

Believe nothing- Question everything.

Woooaaahh! Looks like I've missed a good bun fight! What's going on here? Has Mpaton "crossed the floor" AGAIN? I thoght he'd "seen the light" not long ago?! Has his ID been "hacked" by someone intent on causing mischief????

Anyway, looks like most of the arguments each way have been made but PLEASE mpaton, P-L-E-A-S-E!!!! divest yourself of the notion that you need to drive at a speed such that you can stop in the distance you cna see to be clear at all times!!! This is VERY dangerous and if you really have changed your views back into the "speed kills" camp, I'm sure you'll understand this.

I live on a single track road with high hedges on each side. About 100 yards from my drive there are a couple of blind bends. If I drive round them at 30, I can always stop in the distance I can see to be clear. If I came round the bend an saw a sheep standing in the road (a monthly occurrence) I'd be able to stop quite easily. If, on the other hand, I saw a car coming towards me also doing 30, NEITHER of us would be able to stop before we hit each other. Fortunately, almost all people have a habit of ignoring dangerous bullsh1t dressed up as wise sayings without even thinking about it and very few people ever exceed 20 along that bit. Pretty much every other day I meet someone head-on along there and one of us has to reverse a few yards. It's never been a problem. It LOOKS like it ought to be a huge problem, but it isn't. I've had a few (been here 7 years now) situations where someone HAS been going a bit too fast and we've both had to brake hard, but never an "incident".

So PLEASE, either change that mantra to "drive at HALF the speed at which you could stop in the distance you can see to be clear (OR LESS)" or stay away from Cumbria 'cause I might meet you coming the other way!

Incidentally, that road has a 60 limit.

Odd isn't it? The authorities are perfectly happy for us to select a safe speed WITHIN the limit but they don't appear to think we can continue with that thought process above it.

We have a lot of roads round here which used to be NSL and which are now sprouting or even signs. Clearly the authorities are concerned about speeds on those stretches of road. There is one where I think it is unsafe (in places) at 50 and I have never done more than 40 along those stretches of it that I felt were unsafe to do so. It WAS a 60 limit (like most of them round here) but that didn't matter. Now it has shiny new signs on it. I wonder how many people will think like you and assume that the "competent authorities" have evaluated it carefully and deemed that 50 is a safe speed (in ideal conditions, obviously!) and therefore proceed to do 50 - safe in the knowlege that someone in power who "knows about these things" has decided that 60 wasn't safe, but 50 is?

The phraseology I try to instill in myself and others is to be able to stop comfortably in the distance I know is, and will remain clear. It's a difficult concept for people to realise though - and at the approach to a blind bend zero is too fast. What does one do? Take a speed of least risk - which may be 10 mph but covering the brake - the idea being to be "en pris" for minimum time consistent with being able to deal with an occurrence in the best way possible.

I suspect he gets hen-pecked.

We do have a certain look down to a very effective fine art to keep husbands (or overgrown children) under control



I know what you mean.

Ist a case of being able to see. In winter - easier as we can see through the branches of the hedges. In summer - ist like a green wall

So teh limit point to me ist reduced - so it mean that I need to approach with even more caution so we drive at a speed we actually know we can stop in as we expect a hazard around this bend



Ja - please. Ist a to drive at some speed limits here. Usually we are below

und


People can und do choose a speed with which they feel absolutely safe und comfortable with. Most of us do have an instinct to actually want to survive to grandparenthood.

German A/bahn are example. No one drives well over the ton all the time They drive to conditions und within the safe flow of those conditions by und large.



We see a lot of strange things from the tourists who think that just because a road has whatever lolly - this mean they can drive at or even above it.

There are most certainly stretches where the limited speed would be very unsafe und you drive below it. There are one or two which were perfectly safe at 60 mph but now 40/50 mph complete with a van. I note the van ist never at the one which has the new 50 mph but ist still dangerous (especially with caravans ) all the same.But then ist not a nice little earner

As for the overtake of those caravans One was new-ish .. the middle one was wobbling und the one with the muppet had seen better days.

I would loved Hamster und Jezza to have come along und played conkers with them.

_________________
Nicht ganz im Lot!
Ich setze mich immer wieder in die Nesseln! Der Mad Doc ist mein Mann! Und ich benutzte seinen PC!

UND OUR SMILEYS? Smile ... und the the world smiles with you.
Smiley guy seen when you read
Fine me for Safe Speed
(& other good causes..)

Greatest love & Greatest Achievements Require Greatest Risk
But if you lose the driving plan - don't lose the COAST lesson.
Me?
Je ne regrette rien!

Thanks Delta, I would edit the wording, but your comment clarifies the point.

mpaton might care to consider this:

_________________
Save a cow - eat a vegetarian

Where is that from?

And you could add to that "Or those who have seen with their own eyes, someone who died crashing into a speedcam"...

_________________
Pecunia Prius Equitas et Salus

You could of course just say that the posted limit is the law and, whether it makes sense or not, it's still the law so just obey it and shut up!!!

Well, maybe that works for some of the sheep out there but how many asinine laws do we have, or have had, which were stupid or grossly unfair? I can name a few, one in particular which my life up and took me off in a different direction.

So I'll just say, for me, it has to make sense - there has to be proof. As I have said elsewhere, I am big enough to do a complete U-turn if I am shown good, irrefutable evidence for or against the use of cameras everywhere as a safety feature of our land.

But it sounds like some out there would quack like a duck at every junction if it were simply and stupidly made law.

Well this duck's not for quacking!

_________________
The views expressed in this post are personal opinions and do not necessarily represent the views of Safe Speed.
You will be branded a threat to society by going over a speed limit where it is safe to do so, and suffer the consequences of your actions in a way criminals do not, more so than someone who is a real threat to our society.

Build a wall across the road and tell me that. Park an unlit skip in the street and tell me that. Dont bother to fill in potholes and tell me that.

Speed cameras have NEVER saved a single person, not one!
How do i know that? Well, im sure you can give me the names of those the speed cameras have saved, cant you?
No, i didnt think so.

_________________
"Safety" Scamera Partnerships;
Profitting from death and misery since 1993.

Believe nothing- Question everything.

Not being able to name names is hardly a resounding demonstration of the failure of any given safety feature though is it? Are there in fact any features or devices against which we can place a list (not one or two) of the names of those that such devices have been proven to have saved?

Seatbelt saved my life....

Its the only "safety" device ive ever heard of thats "apparently" saved all these people and yet no one can name the saved people!



Hmm cant give you names of people (but im sure someone could) but safety devices that work and do/have/are saving lives? Heres a short sample.

Seat belts and pretensioners.
Air bags.
ABS, TRACS, ESP
Collapsible steering columns. (procon ten)
Crumple zones.
Redesigned vehicle profiles (limiting pedestrian injuries)
Side intrusion and roll protection.
Auto fuel shut offs.
Laminated screens.
WHIPS (volvo) anti whiplash mech in the seats.
Denovo tyres.....

Tot up the numbers of people saved by the above and then compare it to the "safety benefits" of so called "safety" cameras and there is no comparison.
Speed cameras are a complete con, they can save no one in either a pre or post accident scenario because all they do is take a picture. Thats very very safety orientated, is it not?

Id still like the names of those saved by a scamera, but alas i fear no such names will ever be forthcoming, because there are none, unlike the other devices mentioned.
My brothers life was saved by a crash helmet....theres one name straight off.
Can anyone give me one proven to have been saved by a scamera to match it?

_________________
"Safety" Scamera Partnerships;
Profitting from death and misery since 1993.

Believe nothing- Question everything.

Sure, but those are all safety devices fitted to vehicles, they actively become involved if someone crashes in a vehicle with such a device fitted so making the connection between the device and the crash survivability is easy to do. Thats not to say its the right connection, an airbag may go off in a collision but it may not necessarily have to save your life.

Road system devices on the other hand just sit there. It could be argued that every mile of central reservation crash barrier, every traffic light and yes, every speed camera, has saved a life because their presence has prevented someone going through the cetral reservation, crossing a junction or arriving at a critical point just when someone is crossing the road. Its a silly, specious argument, but no less so than asserting that that a lack of names and addresses of people who are alive today because of speed cameras is needed as proof that they actually work. Or that a lack of such names is proof that they don't.

Last night, a DJ saved my life

_________________
Prepare to be Judged

COAST has saved my life...

_________________
Pecunia Prius Equitas et Salus

West Somerset Free Press, 3rd Nov '06.

_________________
Save a cow - eat a vegetarian