Howdy, Stranger!
Categories
speeding convictions
The materials in this website are in no way intended to replace the professional medical care, advice, diagnosis or treatment of a doctor, qualified personal trainer, therapist, dietitian or nutritionist Runners's World, Part of the Hearst UK well-being network © Copyright 2017
Comments
I'm very anti speeding, well anti driving too fast for the situation not just the speed limit. It suprises me that all runners (and anyone who enjoyes being outdoors) doesn't feel the same. Wheres the joy in trotting around the countryside in fear or your life because of motorists AND there is no reason why pedestrians have any less rights on the roads. In fact I think motorists should have the least rights and pedestrians the most.
I could go on for hours but sensiblity stops me and all this is merely my opinion.
Please could everyone be careful. Just think how terrible you would feel to know you had injured or killed a friend or family member and if you do ever have the misfortune of being in such a accident then it will be someones frind and family member.
Problem is some people seem to think that it's a game to see how fast you can go through them.
To me, being stopped and told off by a policeman is enough of a punishment to stop me doing it again. I was shaken and ashamed and felt suitably chastened. But no, out came the £30 fine ticket to raise revenue and help him meet his conviction targets.
Fine, but then I read of the maniacs like the Man Utd fan with 106!!! driving convictions who killed a father and son cos he was speeding because he was upset Utd had lost. He gets 6 years for the deaths and.... a driving ban! That'll stop him???
The traffic police should stop sitting in their cars picking on easy targets they know will comply and pay up and start dealing with the real dangers. Instead of waiting in a 30 zone where people tend to go at 35 because of a clear run, lack of houses, downhill (like near here) why don't they sit and eat their sandwiches near the houses of well known maniacs driving without insurance, tax , while disqualified and get them off the roads?
But, all credit to our boys in blue, it happens though.
And I'm always in two minds about 'unsafe convictions' which get quashed.
In some cases, they are definitely unsafe due to faulty evidence, etc.
But in others, it seems like it's some scumbag who deserves to rot who has been jailed on what is termed 'unsafe grounds' afterwards, because it was impossible to get them for all the other crimes they are well-known to have done.
I won't mention any cases, but we can all think of them.
Anyway, off home, so you can call me reactionary to your hearts' contents.
And sorry Nessie but your figures for road deaths in the 1950's at 1000 a week are wrong. After an internet search i've discovered that for example in 1955, there were 5526 deaths, thats about 100 people a week, too many of course but not 1000 a week.
A colleague has told me that the 70 mph limit was brought in the the 1960's in response to the launch of the Jaguar E-type.
I want to clear up one or two ambiguities.
The money from speed cameras does not go into the coffers of the Police Authority. In certain trial areas of the country it has to be used to maintain speed cameras and provide new ones. It is a self supporting activity.
In other areas the fines go to the local court system.
Tickets for £30 issued by Officers, provides money for the court system. It actually costs more than £30 to collect it if you take into account the time of everyone involved (apart from the receiver of the ticket) so it is not revenue producing.
There were about 100 deaths per week before the 70 limit. It was introduced partly because of Jaguar racing their cars on the M1, but also because of the horrific crashes that happened there.
We now have the least road deaths in Europe per head of population.
In the 1960s there were substantially less cars on the roads than now. In the 1980s there were substantially less cars on the road than now. There just isn't the space to cope with rapidly closing gaps caused by speeding drivers/riders.
I know there are numerous stretches of road where a speed limit seem odd, but I bet there is some history to that limit, such as a series of fatal accidents. This will not be apparent.
What is this desire to speed? Do you actually ever get anywhere quicker, if so by how long?
I know cameras lack the "personal touch" but they are effective, efficient and economical but they free Officers up to do other things.
As you say, still too many.
Doesn't change my viewpoint.
£30 fine to RW forun hosts!
I don't want to be the one left behind picking up the pieces when my best friend/ partner/ brother/ mum gets killed by some idiot with and advanced motorists certificate feels they are driving within their personal limit. And neither do i want to leave them behind when i get taken out while running on a quiet road with no pavement because someone is late for their supper.
so if you're worried about 'big brother' laws infringing your rights, then please think about mine.
Speed cameras can cause accidents. I frequently use the A303 and near the Wyley dual carrige way the road reduces to a single lane highway (e.g. 60 mph limit). Its at a junction with a very minor road where there was an unfortunate fatality.
However there are now two speed cameras, one facing each way, and the lots of drivers suddenly slow down on seeing them (even if they are doing less than 60 - it seems to be an instinctive reaction). I've now seem several accidents where the unexpected braking of the car in front has caused a 4 or 5 car nose to tail shunt.
Now I would agree with anyone who said they were driving too close, but the cause is the speed cameras, there purpose (so we are told) is to increase safety. It won't be long before there is another fatality.
The accidents could be avoided by not allowing a right turn across a busy road, but making the traffic got up the the next junction on the dual caridgeway, exit it and re-join heading the other way.
As for driving fast, well again going past a school at 3 pm doing 25 in poor conditions is far more reckless than doing 100 at 5 am on an empty dual carrigeway.
In most conditions modern cars can brake, swerve, and handle in ways that out perform vehicles that existed when the current limits were set.
It would be much fairer to relax the speed limits on open roads, but to be MUCH heavier on people who are involved in accidents cause by reckless disregard for the conditions.
What about the incompetents obeying the speed limit who also kill. Are the 'blameless' because they were inside the speed limit?
and
"Now I would agree with anyone who said they were driving too close"
What can I say that you haven't said already?
RR, yes.
I was doing 15mph over the limit in a steady stream of traffic doing the same speed. I was not menecing other drivers, nor was I weaving in and out of traffic trying to find space to go even faster, however I still got the same fine and the same points on my licence.
It is not so much how fast you drive but the manner and the situation you are driving in.
This however is very dificult to police so I think the camaras are a good thing.
I think the status quo would remain anyway. I cannot see the population tolerating a GPS system that monitors all their journeys and I don't think I would want it either. I just find it easier to stick to the speed limits.
It is odd though, that in this country I am stuck at 70mph on the motorways yet, when I go to France I am deemed competent to drive at 86mph.
nice.. have you investigated advanced driving courses ?
my guess is not as you have very little idea as to their content!
Still, it saved the police tracking an idiot who was driving with no insurance and a ban anyway, and the officers would have been able to tick another box and add the papers to their file for pay review submission.