Sigh.

I’m not going to get tangled up in semantics, all that will lead to is six pages of bickering. I took your suggestion of a lack of critical thinking to be a personal insult, if that wasn’t your intention then I cheerfully withdraw my response.

Where is the like button??? ^^^

Not read all the posts. However my experience – I used to drive up the A9 ” making progress” nothing too ridiculous but 10mph over the speed limit and looking for every overtake I could. After a discussion with Scotroutes I decided to try his approach of sitting at the speed limit and only overtaking really slow vehicles. Takes about 15 mins longer max over 150 miles. I only overtake maybe 5 vehicles the whole way instead of 50 and being constantly looking for the overtake, almost never sit behind someone, so much less stress I almost got bored and lost concentration.

I am converted.

Put them everywhere? You’re goin to see a spike in accidents before any reductions…

Plenty of roads have had average speed cameras. Stats19 and other sources show all reported road collisions. Has the spike actually happened? Or is this just made up?

You can’t possible be talking about any in the vicinity of Manchester. Anytime you have any space in front (either on the M60 or M6), it will be filled by someone, or you’ll find a lorry aggressively up you arse.

Admittedly most of my time is spent south of Birmingham, but I still stick to the slow lane and slow lane speeds and do seem to have less conflict and close calls on motorways as a result, even when I do venture north…

I didn’t mean to insult either, I wanted a discussion, I thought your point that many people get caught by cameras speeding whilst overtaking was just not viable and lacked critical thought. It is an invitation to show me why or how people speeding whilst overtaking can get caught by cameras. Do it.

Yes , I get that the time difference is sod all over say 4 miles at 36mph in a 40mph limit. Lets assume that on the overtaking straight the limit goes to 60mph. The lorry is limited by law to 40mph. I am legally allowed to drive at 60mph. There are miles of bends and double white lines coming up with zero overtaking opportunities
Sorry chaps but Im off past that truck and I will use full throttle to pass the HGV as quickly as I can then continue with journey at below the speed limit for my vehicle for the next 10 miles of wiggles/ hills/ roundabouts etc.

This is a problem, I find that as soon as I pull on to the motorway I start yawning.

Sorry chaps but Im off past that truck and I will use full throttle to pass the HGV as quickly as I can then continue with journey at below the speed limit for my vehicle for the next 10 miles of wiggles/ hills/ roundabouts etc.

yup, thats me too.

On the “only being fined for dangerous driving” point.

That’s a spectacularly poor standard of driving to aim for.

For example:

A young Dundee woman who hit and killed a cyclist in a head-on crash in Fife has been spared jail

Jessica Hedley was behind the wheel of a Vauxhall Corsa when it smashed into David Christie on the A92 near Freuchie on February 21 last year.

The 25-year-old nurse was driving to Edinburgh airport when she attempted to overtake a slow-moving HGV.

Mr Christie was wearing a yellow high-visibility jacket and had a flashing light on the front of his bike but Hedley still failed to spot him.

But from a legal point of view, that isn’t dangerous driving, it’s

causing death by careless driving

Nurse who killed Fife cyclist with careless driving is spared jail

Well yes, if you’re overtaking, and it’s safe, get on with it, there are however bloody minded individuals who seem to think it’s entirely reasonable to overtake 1mph faster than the vehicle they are overtaking, because 2mph faster would put them over the limit…insanity.

On the “only being fined for dangerous driving” point.

That’s a spectacularly poor standard of driving to aim for.

For example:
ok, i maybe could have worded it better, but im sure you understood what i was trying to say, the arguments split between those who will not under any conditions drive above the speed limit ‘because its the law’, and those that will where they consider it safe to do so, and think that they shouldnt be fined for it if theyre driving safely.

i think we’re all agreed that we should all drive safely, its just we’re disagreeing on whats acceptable to drive safely 🙂

ok, i maybe could have worded it better, but im sure you understood what i was trying to say, the arguments split between those who will not under any conditions drive above the speed limit ‘because its the law’, and those that will where they consider it safe to do so, and think that they shouldnt be fined for it if theyre driving safely.
i think we’re all agreed that we should all drive safely, its just we’re disagreeing on whats acceptable to drive safely

It’s definitely worth it to save a few seconds.

It’s not speed that’s the problem, poor judgement, spacial awareness and general idiocy is the issue.

If law enforcement spent more time enforcing good driving practices it would have far greater effect than punishing those than are more skilled behind the wheel

Sorry Bnnyball, but do you really mean to say that those who speed are more skilled behind the wheel,than those who don’t? That because they “know” they are more skilled that they should be allowed to do so?
I am not sure I could agree with that position.as it could be that enforcing good driving practice could include not speeding

Or is it that the more skilled you are the faster you should be allowed to go, to a maximum speed where your chances of killing someone are the same as the less skilled driver who is morally compelled to drive slower.

Maybe we could ramp up fines and use the extra money to pay for traffic officers?

You won’t get done by a fixed cam overtaking on a single carriageway.. camera’s pointing the wrong way innit.. bloody bright flash tho!

Does that matter? Wont it work both ways?

I don’t understand why vehicles are capable of more than 70mph in the UK. We should have speed limiters.

I like to be treated as an adult who is capable of self-discipline. If you haven’t the ability to act as an adult behind the wheel maybe get one to drive you.

(Disclaimer it took about 20 years of driving to get to this zen-like state). 8)

I’m catching up after a hectic week.

I dont really give a **** if you over take a bit over the limit and I do sometimes. What really boils my piss is people driving up close to the centre of the road behind you for miles and then fail to **** go when the opportunity arises…back off ****!

bails – Member
Maybe we could ramp up fines and use the extra money to pay for traffic officers?

I suggested exactly that on the last of these threads. Given the number of offenders it’s apparently the current fines are far too low.

What other laws should folk be able to ignore as long as they think they are clever enough?

Maybe we could ramp up fines and use the extra money to pay for traffic officers?

I have often thought something similar. People seem to get up in arms about speeding fines being cash generators but why can’t they be? Speeding is optional so why not make the fines not only cover policing but also pay for cycle lanes, subsidised buses and trains and other things to benefit the community?

5p8 – depends on the cam.. the older style ones take two photos and and calculate distance/over time (between painted lines). Photo 1 = you getting blinded. Photo 2 = nowt there..

Yeah I just looked this up.
https://www.speedcamerasuk.com/speed-camera-faqs.htm#programmed

It’s not speed that’s the problem, poor judgement, spacial awareness and general idiocy is the issue.

This is valid. Problem is its very hard to police. We just use speed as a blunt instrument to indicate unsafe driving. It’s the best we’ve got at the moment. I’d much prefer to see all driving laws replaced with “don’t drive dangerously and don’t drive like an arse”. That should cover most bases and speeding will still form a big part of that. There are far too many people without the ability or sense to follow these simple rules so we need a big book of rules for now

nickewen » 5p8 – depends on the cam.. the older style ones take two photos and and calculate distance/over time (between painted lines). Photo 1 = you getting blinded. Photo 2 = nowt there..

Gatso cameras – the most common ones on the roads I believe – can’t measure oncoming speed. Or rather, they can, but not at the same time as measuring leaving speed, it’s an either / or setup.

I agree such that to say that there are many factors that influence safety such as skill, conditions, judgement, awareness, speed etc.
Varying these factors will have an effect on road safety eg increase skill, or reduce speed or change attitude.
So if we accept that these changes will bring about safety we have to legislate for each one as we are able to control it.
Speed is one of those, it is easy to control and has a significant effect on safety no matter what your skill. EG a very skilled person at 70 MPH on a motorway is less likely to cause harm in the event of an accident than the same person at 90 MPH. That is an indisputable fact. Therefore pragmatics and logic indicate that reducing speed is safer. The rights of the public to be safe outweigh the rights of the individual to get there a few minutes sooner.

scotroutes – Member
What other laws should folk be able to ignore as long as they think they are clever enough?

maybe some of these?

EG a very skilled person at 70 MPH on a motorway is less likely to cause harm in the event of an accident than the same person at 90 MPH. That is an indisputable fact

Is it?

If they’re “very skilled,” the likelihood of them having an accident in the first place is zero.

Speed increases the severity of an accident, not necessarily the likelihood. Though if you’re going to have an accident at 70, I doubt your first thought is going to be “wow, I’m glad I wasn’t going 90, this would’ve been far worse!” (It’s more likely to be, somebody fetch a spatula.)

Well I said it increases the severity, it does.
However it does also increase the likelihood. You have less reaction time to events as you see them over the same distance. Gong faster does not increase your visual acuity.

Eg (I’m making the numbers up) if your braking distance is linear where every 1 MPH is 10metres so at 70 is 700m and at 90 is 900m.
Imagine that you see a stationary object 650m away, at 70 you hit it at 5mph, at 90 you hit it at 25mph. Big difference in severity.
If it was 750m away at 70 you don’t have an accident at 90 you do.

I mistakenly thought that when you said “driving at 90” you were implying that the conditions dictated that it was safe to do so.

If you’re driving at a speed where you cannot sufficiently react to events in the distance you can see, whether that’s 90mph, 30mph or walking pace, you’re driving too fast for the conditions and therefore not “very skilled.”

I mistakenly thought that when you said “driving at 90” you were implying that the conditions dictated that it was safe to do so.

Sorry I am assuming all other factors are fixed, speed only varies.

If you’re driving at a speed where you cannot sufficiently react to events in the distance you can see, whether that’s 90mph, 30mph or walking pace, you’re driving too fast for the conditions and therefore not “very skilled.”

So at 90MPH on the motorway a vehicle crosses the barrier into your path. The likelihood of the event is not related to your driving skill, it is random. Would you rather be doing 90 or 70?

If they’re “very skilled,” the likelihood of them having an accident in the first place is zero.

Zero? Jesus, you don’t half talk bollocks sometimes

speed increases the severity of an accident, not necessarily the likelihood

Erm…reaction time? See above

There is also the problem that if you drive lower than the average speed of the other vehicles on the road you are on that is likely to increase your chances of an accident, however it would reduce the severity…

And that, because your reaction distance changes as you increase speed so your overall braking distance increases non linearly.

Sod safety, speed is fun. I do try to mitigate that though by doing it in what I what deem as a safe as possible manner. Although I’ve walked away from motorbikes because I was getting just silly on them and it was only a matter of time before I was in a box. With a beautiful family I won’t risk that now (but I’ve hurt myself more on my pushbike than anything else).

Scotroutes – I don’t think its the size of the fines that would stop folk speeding – its the likelihood of being caught. Hence the A9 you don’t get folk speeding like we used to as now you will be caught. I couldn’t do it in two hours nowadays to inverness without picking up a ban

Not that bigger fines wouldn’t go amiss – and I would like to see much greater traffic law enforcement and make it self funding included mandatory suspended jail sentence for drink driving and immediate bans for mobile phone usage