Is anyone surprised they are only in it for the money? Yet they have the gall to complain about motorists using 'loopholes' even though many of the partnerships aren't following the rules themselves. The whole system stinks and wants removing. No-one should be making any money from fines. If it were all about road safety only the points would be applied to someone's licence. The govt has refused to do this so we know it is just about making money. Meanwhile road injuries aren't falling and the real causes of accidents are being ignored.
teabelly
|
I propose a protest whereby ABD, SafeSpeed etc all urge their members to stick to the limit.
No offences, no money. The few who make genuine mistakes won't sustain the system alone.
|
|
Ah, but that relies on the fact that the speed penalties are only given to those who aren't breaking the speed limit, when clearly this is not the case, and their accuracy is appaulling to the extent of being a criminal outrage. There have been many high profile 'quirky' stories in the media of Tractors doing 70mph, Fiat Stradas doing 130mph, people parked on the verge doing 40mph. I shudder to think how many people doing 30mph fooled the cameras into thinking they wee going 36mph and other such dross.
|
OK, taking Ashok's comments up, let the campaign be to pass every speed camera at 20mph under the limit. Clearly this would be even safer than passing at the limit, as speed kills.
V
|
oh please Vin, "Speed Kills", what a generalisation - sometimes it is, but it's INAPPROPRIATE SPEED that is the big killer
70mph on motorways and A roads has been set since the 60's despite major improvements in car safety and really should be raised to at least 80mph, with a minimum of 60 mph, for cars and vans so as not to interfere with lorries.
30mph is too fast by hospitals , schools and near parks, but at 01.00 it would be equally safe to drive at 50mph.
I've driven at just 20mph on the A3, because that was the APPROPRIATE speed due to the weather.
|
sorry : speed limits are LIMITS.
Muppets break limits and are fined...law abiding motorists do not.
It's not difficult.. just control your right foot on the pedal called acclerator....
madf
|
|
Just curious madf, but would it be possible for a law-abiding motorist to be a muppet as well?
|
|
|
Yeah fine and dandy if the police and cameras work properly but not so in my case.
I was left with a disrespect of the law , in fact it stinks.
Don't bother fighting them ,they do not like it and wallop you with huge costs just so you do not argue again.
|
|
|
|
'oh please Vin, "Speed Kills", what a generalisation'
Lord above, do you recognise irony?
V
|
These threads bring up the same comments, from the same people every time.
Speed does not kill! I have driven at 130 mph recently and am still alive!
Inappropriate speed, with poor driving is the killer!
However, the simple way to try and reduce accidents is bash the speed, not the driving style!
I am not against speed limits, there is a definite time and place for them! But I am against sped cameras because they do not catch poor driving!
You can kill at 20 mph, you can be alive at 130 mph!
|
OK, so speeding fines are a form of taxation, but I (touch wood) don't have a problem with this. I'm a poverty-stricken, tight-fisted git - I hate Gordon Brown and I hate paying taxes so I avoid paying speeding taxes in the same way that I avoid paying cigarette duty. All it takes is a little will power - and just as stopping smoking will make you a fitter, healthier person, so keeping to speed limits will make you a better, safer driver.
So, if you want some encouragement to lighten your right foot, just think of Gordon Brown rubbing his hands with glee waiting for your next contribution - just don't let him incense you to road-rage ;-)
|
>>so keeping to speed limits will make you a better, safer driver.<<
It was all going great until you said that.
|
|
Well all other things being equal it won't make you a worse driver. Some folks are dozy beggars at any speed.
|
Apparently the new generation of cameras aren't legal anyway.
www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2006...l
|
>>so keeping to speed limits will make you a better, safer driver.<<
It was all going great until you said that.<<
I thought I'd put that in to stir things up a bit - but I am very wary of the common arrogant attitude that says 'I am a really good driver and I don't need speed limits getting in my way'. Is it any different from the attitude 'I am a really good driver and I am perfectly capable of using my mobile phone whilst driving'?
|
I'm tired of the arguments as much as everyone else so I don't want to bang on about it. But a set speed limit doesn't make you safe. I hate the attitude (not yours I hasten to add - just the attitude in general) that people go "Oh well I'm under the limit therefore I'm safe as houses."
Doesn't work, not true, and one could argue is more dangerous than a habitual speeder.
|
wary of the common arrogantattitude that says 'I am a really good driver and I don't need speed limits getting in my way'.
This may be a common attitude but a majority of drivers are fairly carp so it isn't really the point.
The point is that boredom makes people lose concentration and get irritated, both bad for driving. If they drive at their natural speed this is less likely to happen. It keeps them awake and in good spirits.
That's why unnaturally low speed limits, of which there are many, and long lines of po-faced twits or 'law-abiding motorists' as some prefer to call them, waddling along 5mph below those limits, are not just contemptible but dangerous.
So there.
|
|
|
|
