Forum menu
As Cougar says, we don't have 'paying attention or not?' cameras yet, so we can't check for that without loads more traffic police (which I'd like to see).
But why is the choice always "Attentive driver going over the speed limit VS blind drunkard doing 3mph under the limit"? Why not "Attentive driver going over the speed limit VS Attentive driver obeying the limit"? Do you stop looking at what's going on in front of you when you go below the limit?
Did one of the new courses earlier this year provided by AA Drivetech. Would like to say it was a load of cobblers, but no, it wasn't, it was quite interesting. A bit superficial, but then 4 hours is not long really. Definitely better than points. I suspect the old courses were a bit like being told off by an angry nun.
Did I learn anything? Perhaps - the braking from 30, 40 35 & in particular 33 videos were quite surprising. I also learned that many, many people have never seen the highway code since their test. Of those, quite a few demanded to know why they couldn't be informed when bits of it changed! 😯
Surprised it took over an hour for this thread to degenerate.
But why is the choice always "Attentive driver going over the speed limit VS blind drunkard doing 3mph under the limit"?
Because it's empty rhetoric. They are on the defensive, and looking for an argument to justify their desire to go fast. They can't find a proper one so they pull this crap out instead, and won't accept that it's flawed as you point out.
Because it's empty rhetoric.
Nope, it is an illustration that speeding is not by default dangerous, it's just not legal. You can drive under the speed limit, not be detected by cameras but still be dangerous. The problem with all these discussions is that ultimately it's all about context.
Speeding is speeding, it may or may not involve dangerous driving. Likewise, dangerous driving is dangerous driving, it may or may not involve speeding.
I do occasionally wonder whether the roads would be safer overall if we replaced the driver's airbag with a 6" metal spike in the centre of the steering wheel.
Driving an old 1971 VW Camper- I was VERY conscious that if I had a crash I'd have serious leg injuries and probably have to have the steering wheel removed from my abdomen.
They are on the defensive, and looking for an argument to justify their desire to go fast.
Not as bad as those who just just can't read the speed limit signs.....
Thanks for all the feedback. Will now be booking myself onto a course and getting my best notebook and pen ready 🙂
I wonder what my ratio of signs seen to signs missed is? I wonder what yours is?
Nope, it is an illustration that speeding is not by default dangerous
No, it is. WHATEVER you do, it's more dangerous to do it faster. Because you (and everyone else) has less time to react, and if there is an accident the consequences will be worse. It makes everything you do more dangerous.
You can drive under the speed limit, not be detected by cameras but still be dangerous.
Yes but this is so blatantly obvious it doesn't need pointing out. And no-one's trying to defend it either.
Next time your racing home from your ride at the trail centre - think about road cyclists please.
I got caught after I had been on a speed awareness course so they obviously don't work and as such I asked for my money back...
WHATEVER you do, it's more dangerous to do it faster.
Run away from a tiger.
Yeah you might trip, and if you are going faster it'll hurt more.
I accept those risks in that context.
Back on the roads, tractor in front of me doing 30mph. No queue, so I don't have to wait my turn. Is it safer to overtake it at 31mph or 50mph?
Ok fair point.
No, it is. WHATEVER you do, it's more dangerous to do it faster.
No, it isn’t.
And an increase in danger from 'not dangerous' to 'a bit more dangerous than not dangerous' doesn't mean you are now doing something dangerous.
And an increase in danger from 'not dangerous' to 'a bit more dangerous than not dangerous' doesn't mean you are now doing something dangerous.
Problem with driving is that many people don't realise it's dangerous until it's too late.
Some people need to go on a self-awareness course
And an increase in danger from 'not dangerous' to 'a bit more dangerous than not dangerous' doesn't mean you are now doing something dangerous.
Moreover, it's not black and white, it's a relative scale.
Walking across the road to get to my car isn't "dangerous" in absolute terms, but it's more dangerous than staying in bed. Driving at 15mph is more dangerous than driving at 10mph, and less dangerous than driving at 20mph, but that doesn't mean any of these things are particularly dangerous in and of themselves. Driving down the motorway at 150mph is safer than doing it at 200mph, is it safe?
Ie, Molgrips is saying that what Bluebird said is incorrect, but his explanation then moves the goalposts. Doing something faster may well be "more dangerous" but that's not the same as saying it's a dangerous activity.
Of course, what you say is all very obvious. So why not draw an arbitrary line for most situations that we can all stick to? We could perhaps put it on signs by the roadside.
Why? Given the points on my licence make no difference to me whereas a course would have required me taking a day off work.
Those three points will be valid for three years and you'll have to inform about them for five.
Get another ticket and your on 6 points and the insurance companies will start to take notice.
So why not draw an arbitrary line for most situations that we can all stick to?
Of course, that's exactly what we've done. And it's precisely the "arbitrary" nature that we're talking about.
We could perhaps put it on signs by the roadside.
Would you think that would be clear enough, or maybe too easy to miss?
A point it worth about £50 on your insurance*.
So, 3 points x 5 years x £50 = £750.
Do the course.
*Source - My last speed awareness course.
However, some insurance companies ask if you have attended a speed awareness course even though in the eyes of the law it is not a conviction. Admiral bumped up my premium. I told them that I wouldn't renew. Admiral took off their addition.
It isn't just us reckless speeding motorists that are criminals 😉
I've been done twice in 28 years for doing 36 in a 30. Once at 7:00am on a saturday, once dropping from 50 to 30 (but not quickly enough). It was my fault and I am a bad man, unlike some people on here who never stray over the limit on their high horses.
Ironically those complaining and attending about points/courses are usually the ones who speed and are caught.
Good observational skills tends to avoid these.......
Getting caught should point out rudely and clearly that you really aren't the type who should be 'speeding'.
BTW - I'm very good at making good/smooth progress in a car. Smooth/good progress isn't speeding its planning ahead, adapting to the road ahead etc.
Speeders plough on...and are caught.
I went on a speed awareness course and although I thought I was quite knowledgeable I learned a few things.
It was quite amusing listening to some peoples attitudes/view points/excuses.
My favorite excuse being delivered by a little old lady who said "I wasn't watching the road so didn't see the camera. I had friends in the back of my car and I like to look at them while talking" - I think that should have been a license removal there and then! She then proceeded to answer the question "how far behind the car in front should you be if traveling at 70mph on the motorway?" with "1 foot!"
A point it worth about £50 on your insurance*.
In my experience it isn't. Not for a 3pt SP30, made no difference
[ninja edit]
She then proceeded to answer the question "how far behind the car in front should you be if traveling at 70mph on the motorway?" with "1 foot!"
I think she must live near me 😀
Did she attempt to justify that answer in any way at all?
hora - MemberIronically those complaining and attending about points/courses are usually the ones who speed and are caught.
Good observational skills tends to avoid these.......
Getting caught should point out rudely and clearly that you really aren't the type who should be 'speeding'.
BTW - I'm very good at making good/smooth progress in a car. Smooth/good progress isn't speeding its planning ahead, adapting to the road ahead etc.
Speeders plough on...and are caught.
Taking that as a green light 😀
It'd be more interesting if everyone spilled the beans about past accidents. I've a couple friends who never knowingly stray above the speed limits, but it's a scary experience accepting a lift from them and there cars are constantly being repaired from various low speed battles.
Temporary suspension for all involved in an incident pending retest would go some way to sorting out the accident stats, plus compulsory retests every 5 years or so.
once dropping from 50 to 30 (but not quickly enough).
Exactly how I got caught. I was in the process of decelerating for a 30 limit from a 50 but hadn't quite got down to 30 as I passed the sign. If they'd pinged me a couple of seconds later I'd have been within the limit. Mia culpa.
She then proceeded to answer the question "how far behind the car in front should you be if traveling at 70mph on the motorway?" with "1 foot!"
A colleague went on a course and was surprised to hear answers to "what is the national speed limit on a single carriageway road (out of a built up area :wink:)" varying from 40mph to 90mph 😯
Cougar, that wouldn't have happened had we been on high horses.
What the anecdotes in this thread, the death and injury stats and general experience on the roads tell you is that the driving test is too easy, penalties for inadequate driving are not high enough, and drivers need re-testing more frequently
It'd be more interesting if everyone spilled the beans about past accidents
I'm not sure as that's a good metric either. I've had four collisions in the last two years. Five in fact, if you count my previous car. In each case, I was stationary.
5) Back in the Mondeo, very bad weather conditions. Traffic up ahead stopped suddenly, I stopped because I'd left sufficient braking distance, guy behind wasn't so lucky. That smarted a bit.
2) Very tight single-track country road, met oncoming traffic. I drove as far over into the ditch / hedgerow as I could and waited for them to pass; first vehicle squeezed past, second dragged itself down the side of my car in the process and then sped off.
3) Waiting to pull out of a side road, young lad turned off from the major road far too fast, didn't see the parked car in front of him and clipped me in swerving to try and avoid it.
4) Approaching a hump-backed bridge, boy racer came over the bridge the other way with his head on fire. I stopped before the bridge where it was still wide enough for two-way traffic, he bounced across the road trying to wrestle control, ricocheted off a dry stone wall into the side of me.
5) Queuing to enter a mini roundabout, been there half a minute or so, someone kindly slammed into the back of me. Understandable as my car was no doubt difficult to see, being a bright red family saloon with its brake lights on.
What the anecdotes in this thread, the death and injury stats and general experience on the roads tell you is that the driving test is too easy, penalties for inadequate driving are not high enough, and drivers need re-testing more frequently
The UK has some of the safest roads and lowest accident rates in the world...
brooess - MemberWhat the anecdotes in this thread, the death and injury stats and general experience on the roads tell you is that the driving test is too easy, penalties for inadequate driving are not high enough, and drivers need re-testing more frequently
Yup, if you keep getting caught and/or keep hitting things then you're not really cut out for this driving lark.....
As above, suspend everyone involved in a shunt pending retest, retest every 5 years and 3 strikes your out, you incompetent ****
and if you got caught by one of those big yellow boxes on a pole then I'm assuming you've fallen asleep 😀
No, it is. WHATEVER you do, it's more dangerous to do it faster. Because you (and everyone else) has less time to react, and if there is an accident the consequences will be worse. It makes everything you do more dangerous.
Driving at 65mph on a fast stretch of motorway when everyone else is doing 80+? Sometimes going quicker is safer, although I understand your point.
Driving slower is a bit of a skill, it takes time to learn, but it's nice when you get it. So much more chilled. I also agree with Hora about none of us being "good" drivers, we can all improve. Don't get complacent.
Cougar - ModeratorIt'd be more interesting if everyone spilled the beans about past accidents
I'm not sure as that's a good metric either. I've had four collisions in the last two years. Five in fact, if you count my previous car. In each case, I was stationary.
5) Back in the Mondeo, very bad weather conditions. Traffic up ahead stopped suddenly, I stopped because I'd left sufficient braking distance, guy behind wasn't so lucky. That smarted a bit.
2) Very tight single-track country road, met oncoming traffic. I drove as far over into the ditch / hedgerow as I could and waited for them to pass; first vehicle squeezed past, second dragged itself down the side of my car in the process and then sped off.
3) Waiting to pull out of a side road, young lad turned off from the major road far too fast, didn't see the parked car in front of him and clipped me in swerving to try and avoid it.
4) Approaching a hump-backed bridge, boy racer came over the bridge the other way with his head on fire. I stopped before the bridge where it was still wide enough for two-way traffic, he bounced across the road trying to wrestle control, ricocheted off a dry stone wall into the side of me.
5) Queuing to enter a mini roundabout, been there half a minute or so, someone kindly slammed into the back of me. Understandable as my car was no doubt difficult to see, being a bright red family saloon with its brake lights on.
How unlucky are you?! 😀
We'll look at writing in some sort of exemption and name it after you 🙂
Driving at 65mph on a fast stretch of motorway when everyone else is doing 80+? Sometimes going quicker is safer
I do that all day every day, in a vehicle that's speed limited.
It's no more "dangerous" than speeding to keep up with the 80+ crowd.
In fact, I'm fairly sure it's safer, but that's just my own observations from doing shed loads of miles at less than 65 on motorways.
The UK has some of the safest roads and lowest accident rates in the world...
I'd be quite interested to know how true that is.
[url= http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_traffic-related_death_rate ]Most road accident stats I see[/url] are only for injuries or deaths.
If you go by those then yes we do have comparatively "safe" roads.
But a lot of that can be attributed to factors other than [i]good driving[/i].
e.g. we're high income country so there are many more modern cars on the roads - which means more modern safety features to avoid accidents (ABS, Traction Control etc) and more features to lessen or avoid injury (seatbelts, airbags, impact bars, crumple zones etc).
We also build features into our roads to lessen accidents as standard (crash barriers, collapsible posts etc) that some other countries don't.
And of course we have roads where the traffic is pretty homogenous - mostly motor vehicles doing the same speed, an occasional cyclist, but very little in the way of horses, cattle, elephant etc!
How unlucky are you?!
I'm thinking of taking the car in to have it demagnetised.
But a lot of that can be attributed to factors other than good driving.
And yet for all those modern advances, the speed limits haven't changed since the 60's. How come it's safe to drive this 1966 car at 70mph:
[img] 
[/img]
... yet dangerous to drive this 2014 model at (say) 80mph?
[img] 
[/img]
Is that the new model Mondeo? 😯
[i]googles furiously[/i]
It is, that's very nice
Isn't it.
One of the reasons I didn't replace my Mondeo with another Mondeo is I knew the MkV was imminent and would've been gutted that it wasn't available when I was swapping cars.
I think these courses might me more effective if the instructor wore boxing gloves, asked a series of safety related questions and administered a thump in the face for each wrong answer.