speed camera rant!

[Weird Al Yankovic]

so do I , maybe cover more miles while on call.

 

However my argument is some la's say its ok to do 79 , others dont and nick you for it.

 

Who is wright and who is wrong.

 

But the point I am making, and trying to get an answer to, is that a driver will know what the speed limit is for whatever particular road they are on.

 

What is the difficulty in understanding that?

 

Where in the UK is one able to drive at 79mph on a public road?

 

You wouldn't need to know about one force's policy from another if you simply drove at what the speed limit indicates.

 

Were you not taught this when learning to drive?

 

Do you not realise that to drive at 80mph on a 100 mile journey simply gains just minutes if one had driven at 70mph?

 

Why risk anything for a few minutes?

[patdavies]

Where in the UK is one able to drive at 79mph on a public road?

 

According to some legal eagles (who should know what they are talking about), anywhere where the signage is unlawful. Improper signing does not revert to previous limit or even NSL - it means that in law, there is no limit

[Tom87]

...excess speed is a very minor issue compared with some of the dangerous driving and drunk driving that no amount of speed cameras will prevent

 

It doesn't matter if you think it's a comparitively minor issue (and I think many will disagree, especially those who have had relatives killed by drivers going at 35 when they may have surived if they'd been going at 30). The fact is, it is still a crime and it must be punished accordingly to stop people doing it. I agree that drink driving is a very serious issue, but you can focus more on drink driving without compromising the focus on speeding - there is no need to relax the attitude on one crime to focus more on another crime. So would you condone relaxing punishment on rapists to focus more punishment on murderers?

 

Given that speed cameras were introduced as Safety Measure and that this has been shown not to work then these instruments are nothing more than revenue generators - just another means of wringing more money out of the motorist.

 

I agree with you that some are there just for money and not for safety. However, a motorist CANNOT moan about having money "wringed out of them" if they have been speeding. It a serious criminal offence, completely their own fault and their lax attitude to speeding completlely serves them right. If you just obeyed the law you would not have a penny "wringed out" of you.

 

A colleague of mine got done for 79 in Gwent and she swears she was doing 75 at most. See what I mean about tolerance, guidance and margins for error.

 

If she admits that she was doing 75, she was speeding, and so commiting a crime and was asking to get caught. It is an extremely bad attitude if she feels there was nothing wrong with going at 75. I think any driver who speeds, however much or little, has absolutely no reason to complain if they get punished for it.

 

Once again, as I and others too have stated already: what is so difficult about obeying the speed limit?!

 

Speed cameras are paid for by the money of the morons who speed. No morons, no speed cameras. Yet the morons moan about them when they are the ones choosing deliberately to maintain their upkeep by constantly speeding.

[toadsRmylife]

I think we are a little off the point here guys (and gals) this is not about whether it is legal or recommended to drive over the speed limit . speeding is not a serious criminal offence its a minor motoring offense which becomes more serious and can develop into dangerous driving as the 'needle climbs'

Weird Al Yankovic - with an attitude like that you MUST be a member of the constabulary, i am very busy in my work thank you very much. My point is that excessive speed is something that needs to be judged by a human - not just looking at the numbers, everyone without exception who has ever overtaken someone on a motorway has broken the speed limit and risked the points etc.. human says 'that was an overtaking maneuver officer' machine says 'your nicked'

me and many many other motorists feel harassed and over policed in this (and probably many other) areas. i take the point that cracking down on minor offenses helps to detect and prevent more serious offenses - but it takes a human being to do that! Fixed speed cameras are next to useless, the good drivers (like me!) don't need them, and the bad drivers learn where they are... just revenue machines to catch the unwary commuter out whilst he going about his business (and make everyone stamp on the brakes as a reaction, speeding or not). Don't even get me started on the mobile speed traps and enforcement officers hiding by the side of the road, public servants hunting the public... what next.

[Weird Al Yankovic]

According to some legal eagles (who should know what they are talking about), anywhere where the signage is unlawful. Improper signing does not revert to previous limit or even NSL - it means that in law, there is no limit

 

Please provide the source for this information please? Who are these legal eagles?

 

Unless they are the law makers of this country who have recently changed the law then you and I, and everbody who has passed their driving test, will know that the highest speed limit possible within the UK is 70mph on a motorway.

 

Again, where is one allowed to drive at 79mph on a public road?

[Rob S]

We'll have to agree to differ on this one. I'm not a supporter of his party but I absolutely applaud the new Mayor of London who says cutting down on the 'petty' crimes helps to reduce serious crime.

 

Speeding is not a recordable offence. I suggest you re-read what BJ was talking about and you will see he was referring to recordable criminal offences.

 

I think this is 1000% true and I mention this because it can be used with driving offences: Stopping people from going a few miles an hour over the limit will cut down on their bad habits and will make them less likely to speed more seriously in future.

 

Excess speed is a factor in a mere 7% of accidents according to the Police. So how about tackling the causes of the other 93%?

 

Personally I think it the only "holier than thou" attitude displayed here is to think you are doing nothing wrong when you are going a few miles over the limit. You are breaking the law, there are no two ways about it! Whether you're a few mph over the limit or double the limit, you are still speeding and it is deservedly punishable.

 

About time you took a reality check:rolleyes: People are fed up with the money being raked in from speed cameras, yet nothing is done to deal with the drivers who routinely drive dangerously, in defective cars or without insurance. More traffic police would be able to tackle these problems, but instead of increasing traffic police numbers they have been dramatically reduced. In London for example the number of traffic officers is about 50% of the level it was 20 years ago,

 

This is what I was referring to by the dangerous and arrogant drivers who think a 30 sign means 35, etc. It does not!

 

And 35 in a 30 does not always equal dangerous driving. Yet 25 in a 30 can sometimes be dangerous. Has that thought crossed your mind?

 

also find it astounding when a driver is stopped by the police for speeding a few miles over the limit and they retort to the police officer, "go and catch some real criminals." Well, you ARE a real criminal if you constantly drive like this!

 

No they are not, they have not committed a recordable offence. So that does not make them real criminals.

Edited May 17, 2008 by Rob S

[Rob S]

I agree with you that some are there just for money and not for safety. However, a motorist CANNOT moan about having money "wringed out of them" if they have been speeding. It a serious criminal offence.

 

 

Thanks for giving me a good laugh!!!:D:D if you think speeding is a "serious criminal offence" how on earth do you categorise aggravated burglary or GBH or murder?

 

I await your response with eager anticipation:rolleyes:

[Weird Al Yankovic]

I think we are a little off the point here guys (and gals) this is not about whether it is legal or recommended to drive over the speed limit . speeding is not a serious criminal offence its a minor motoring offense which becomes more serious and can develop into dangerous driving as the 'needle climbs'

Typical attitude from a speed demon who then discovers reality too late when they take a life.

In fact, the law should be much tighter and lock up for life those who take a life with such scant disregard.

Weird Al Yankovic - with an attitude like that you MUST be a member of the constabulary,No, just someone who is able to drive and read speed signs, in both English and Welsh btw.

 

i am very busy in my work thank you very much.Yes, but are your success rates any good by the views you show here?

 

My point is that excessive speed is something that needs to be judged by a human But no way could a human measure speed as accurately as a machine which is properly callibrated. Try and stand next to a motorway and judge for yourself the next ten cars-I bet you will be way out.- not just looking at the numbers, everyone without exception who has ever overtaken someone on a motorway has broken the speed limit and risked the points etc.. human says 'that was an overtaking maneuver officer' machine says 'your nicked'

me and many many other motorists feel harassed and over policed in this (and probably many other) areas. i take the point that cracking down on minor offenses helps to detect and prevent more serious offenses - but it takes a human being to do that! Fixed speed cameras are next to useless, the good drivers (like me! What a joke!) don't need them, and the bad drivers learn where they are...

 

just revenue machines to catch the unwary commuter out whilst he going about his business Complete myth!! Why have I never had a speeding ticket then? And I drove some 400 miles a day for 4 years! (and make everyone stamp on the brakes as a reaction, speeding or not).

 

Don'even get me started... I won't!! Save us all from the rubbish you waffle on about!!! on the mobile speed traps and enforcement officers hiding by the side of the road, public servants hunting the public... what next.

...

[Weird Al Yankovic]

Thanks for giving me a good laugh!!!:D:D if you think speeding is a "serious criminal offence" how on earth do you categorise aggravated burglary or GBH or murder?

 

I await your response with eager anticipation:rolleyes:

 

How about when an idiot kills a little 4 year old girl doing 70 in a 30 zone as happened in my village last Xmas?

 

Bad enough for ya??!!!

[Rob S]

How about when an idiot kills a little 4 year old girl doing 70 in a 30 zone as happened in my village last Xmas?

 

Bad enough for ya??!!!

 

That wouldn't be speeding though Al, that would be causing death by dangerous driving.

[Tom87]

Speeding IS dangerous driving.

 

How in your right mind can you say that going 70 in a 30 zone is not breaking the speed limit - i.e. speeding?! You need a mental arithmetic check even more than a reality check.

 

I hope you will learn one day for your own and everyone's benefit that speeding, whether a recorded offence or not, is breaking the law, and is dangerous. I hope you will learn this by coming to your senses and not by being involved in an accident.

 

I agree fully with Weird Al Jankovic's bullet point-like observations from today (17th May) at 12:58. There's nothing to suggest he's a policeman - if he is that doesn't matter: I'm not a policeman but I agree completely with him - why bother breaking speed limits? He is simply a normal, law abiding driver like myself, and (from the opinions expressed in your posts) apparently unlike you, Rob S. Or if you don't speed yourself, you certainly seem to be condone it, which is unacceptable.

 

I repeat myself: yes, there are offences that are more serious than slight speeding. But there is no need to relax the attitude on speeding, as it can and does kill. It is quite possible to strengthen resources in other areas, such as uninsured drivers or drink driving, without loosing a grip on the speeding problem.

 

I'm not defending speed cameras - far from it - I'm simply saying the morons who speed can only blame themselves for the moneymaking schemes that exist because of their lack of road sense and their disgraceful "I know best" attitude that puts everyone else's life at risk who is unfortunate enough to be sharing the same piece of road as them.

 

Yes, of course there are roads where it is not safe to go at the posted speed limit. Where have I said otherwise? The 30 sign etc. is the MAXIMUM speed limit, not the compulsory speed limit. There is nothing wrong with going below it and adapting to the conditions (unless you are going unnecessarily slowly which is of course dangerous in itself). But it IS wrong, dangerous and illegal to go above it.

 

As regards your quote, it is true but completely irrelevant that it is not always dangerous to go 35 in a 30 zone. This doesn't matter - it is still breaking the law and you shouldn't do it. You seem to think you're above the law and you know better. You aren't and you don't.

 

I suppose there will always be those difficult and stubborn people who will refuse to comply with the most simple of rules, such as the speed limit, just out of selfishness.

 

I am NOT defending speed cameras here - they do indeed have many very bad points. I am simply saying that if people just went by the speed limits, there would be none of your dreaded cameras because there would be no profitability in having them. By speeding, you are simply prolonging the existence of speed cameras.

 

OP: as to calling yourself a good driver and acknowledging you speed and think it's fine to do so - that's a complete contradiction. You can't be both of them. If you're a good driver you don't speed and shamelessly flout the law like that, believing deludedly that you're doing nothing wrong.

Edited May 17, 2008 by Tom87

[Weird Al Yankovic]

That wouldn't be speeding though Al, that would be causing death by dangerous driving.

 

And what was the single contributing factor of the dangerous driving?

 

Want to take a guess?

[Rob S]

Speeding IS dangerous driving.

 

The Road Traffic Act doesn't seem to agree with you, otherwise there would be no offence of breaking the speed limit, just a charge of dangerous driving.

 

I hope you will learn one day for your own and everyone's benefit that speeding, whether a recorded offence or not, is breaking the law, and is dangerous. I hope you will learn this by coming to your senses and not by being involved in an accident.

 

I'm an experienced driver with almost 30 years experience with 400000 miles under my belt, most of them on a motorcycle. I have completed a number of advanced driving courses and I am also a qualified motorcycle instructor. I learnt a long time ago that exceeding an arbitrary speed limit does not make you a dangerous driver, but inappropriate speed for the conditions does. It's obvious that you have difficulty in grasping this concept. I suggest you read Roadcraft, the police driving manual, and see what is says about speed limits. It might give you some idea and spare us from your ill informed rants.

 

I repeat myself: yes, there are offences that are more serious than slight speeding. But there is no need to relax the attitude on speeding, as it can and does kill. It is quite possible to strengthen resources in other areas, such as uninsured drivers or drink driving, without loosing a grip on the speeding problem.

 

So speeding is not dangerous driving now? Not so long ago you were saying it was, now you have backtracked. Please make up your mind.

 

Yes, of course there are roads where it is not safe to go at the posted speed limit. Where have I said otherwise? The 30 sign etc. is the MAXIMUM speed limit, not the compulsory speed limit. There is nothing wrong with going below it and adapting to the conditions (unless you are going unnecessarily slowly which is of course dangerous in itself). But it IS wrong, dangerous and illegal to go above it.

 

Ah, back to the "speeding is dangerous" mantra.

 

As regards your quote, it is completely irrelevant that it is indeed not always dangerous to go 35 in a 30 zone. This doesn't matter - it is still breaking the law and you shouldn't do it. You seem to think you're above the law and you know better. You aren't and you don't.

 

Who said that I go at that speed in a 30 limit? I was just merely pointing out the folly of your argument that speeding is dangerous driving.

[Rob S]

And what was the single contributing factor of the dangerous driving?

 

Want to take a guess?

 

So you have been privy to all the evidence that the collision investigation unit and the fatal collision examiner collated and presented to the CPS I take it?

[Tom87]

Speeding is dangerous driving. I meant (though I'm sure you knew anyway but just felt like arguing for the sake of it) that there are other sorts of dangerous driving apart from speeding.

 

It doesn't matter if exceeding the speed limit is not always dangerous. It is the law! I'm sure it applies to all of us that there are aspects of the law that we don't agree with. But this doesn't matter because we still have to obey it. If you're too childish to accept this basic concept then it serves you right when you get caught for doing it.

 

I'm not surprised to read that you ride motorcycles. A significant minority of motorcyclists seem to have this attitude that the speed limit doesn't apply to them. I have so often been going at 60 in a 60 road and a motorcycle has overtaken me and within a few seconds he is completely gone. And motorcyclists who behave like this wonder why their accident rate is so high?! Do you teach your pupils that they can completely ignore the speed limit? It seems like it given the number of motorcyclists who constantly go miles above the limit.

 

The fact that you are experienced makes it even more shameful and inexcusable that you believe it is OK to speed.

Edited May 17, 2008 by Tom87

[Weird Al Yankovic]

So you have been privy to all the evidence that the collision investigation unit and the fatal collision examiner collated and presented to the CPS I take it?

 

No, just a friend of the family.

 

However, it was in the local press, news and was even in some of the nationals too.

 

The chap wasn't drunk, on drugs, using a mobile etc etc.

 

He was speeding. And that was the only reason concluded by experts.

 

Why not take a visit to the cemetery and leave a teddy or something? She would be 5 next month.

[Tom87]

I'll try and be neutral for once......

 

However many different points of view there are here, there is a clear fact:

 

Exceeding the speed limit is illegal.

 

Notwithstanding its consqeuences, and whether you agree with it or not, it doesn't matter; it is against the law so you should not do it.

 

There is no excuse for breaking the speed limit and there is no reason to be upset when you get a ticket for it, as you made the conscious decision to do it, knowing it is against the law.

 

-----------

 

OK that's my neutrality done.

 

With the consequences of it, as described by Al, it beggars belief how anyone can try and defend ignoring the speed limits. The sad thing is, a tragic event like that happens every week. Yet there are still people - apparently even driving instructors - who think it is OK to drive like that.

Edited May 17, 2008 by Tom87

[green_and_mean]

If the concern is over the use of it to make money here is a suggestion...

 

How about instead of a fine you get an automatic 2 week ban on the first offence, a month on the second and a year on the 3rd? Then there could be no question of it being used to raise money as a stealth tax.

[Rob S]

No, just a friend of the family.

 

However, it was in the local press, news and was even in some of the nationals too.

 

The chap wasn't drunk, on drugs, using a mobile etc etc.

 

He was speeding. And that was the only reason concluded by experts.

 

Why not take a visit to the cemetery and leave a teddy or something? She would be 5 next month.

 

And you've seen all the reports into this accident then?

[Rob S]

I'll try and be neutral for once......

 

However many different points of view there are here, there is a clear fact:

 

Exceeding the speed limit is illegal.

 

So it's no longer dangerous ?

 

-----------

 

OK that's my neutrality done.

 

With the consequences of it, as described by Al, it beggars belief how anyone can try and defend speeding. The sad thing is, a tragic event like that happens every week. Yet there are still people - apparently even driving instructors - who think it is OK to drive like that.

 

Can you point me to the driving instructors who have said it is ok to travel at 70mph in a 30mph limit please?

[Tom87]

If the concern is over the use of it to make money here is a suggestion...

 

How about instead of a fine you get an automatic 2 week ban on the first offence, a month on the second and a year on the 3rd? Then there could be no question of it being used to raise money as a stealth tax.

 

That is a great idea Would stop all these dangerous arrogant drivers using the money argument in their vendetta against anti-speeding equiment just for their want of driving too fast. They only use it as a distraction so that their outrageous driving habits go unnoticed.

 

And you've seen all the reports into this accident then?

 

What are you trying to get at?

 

The guy goes 70 in a 30 zone and kills a young child. Are you so narrow-minded and stubborn that you are refusing to accept that it was obviously the speed that killed her?

[Weird Al Yankovic]

And you've seen all the reports into this accident then?

 

No but the family did and I believe an inquest's findings are freely available which is why the press accurately reported the facts.

 

Why can't you accept that speeding can be a serious criminal offence?

[letshelp]

For an offence of dangerous driving to succeed there has to be more agravating circumstances than just the speed. The CPS in Merseyside rejected a charge of dangerous driving against a driver doing 92mph, yes 92 in a 30mph limit. Now if only one of his lights had been out.............

[Rob S]

Why can't you accept that speeding can be a serious criminal offence?

 

Because speeding on it's own is not a serious criminal offence. A serious criminal offence is something like murder, GBH with intent, aggravated burglary, kidnapping, grooming a child for sex etc etc. Doing 33mph in a 30 limit is not a serious criminal offence.

[Rob S]

What are you trying to get at?

 

The guy goes 70 in a 30 zone and kills a young child. Are you so narrow-minded and stubborn that you are refusing to accept that it was obviously the speed that killed her?

 

All I have seen about this alleged incident is a post by another member stating it happened. I prefer to see somethign substantial such as evidence, rather than emotive posts from people who have their own agenda within this thread.

 

That's not being stubborn and narrow minded, that's being objective and wanting to see all the facts to allow me to judge properly. And I'm not prepared to do that without having seen teh facts.