zero tolerance on speeding !!!!!!!!!!!!!

Ravenous

  ...now go 5/10% below to compensate - it already happens with the roads full of incompetence and driving 46mph in a 50mph on an A road between towns

I hear this a lot - can someone explain to me what the actual danger is of people going a bit below the speed limit? (Annoying someone does not count.)

Bezzer

strtdv said:

57Deluxe said:

you can do more than 30 on a bicycle - well I could. I used to chase the Bus from Walton to Addlestone cos was always two top totties sitting on the back seat waving and blowing kisses at me after a night out...

Speed limits don't apply to bicycles (they only apply to motor vehicles), but you knew that of course..

Certainly round this way, it appears that no laws apply to bicycles.

PC_Dave

It’s crap really - the money from Speed Cameras doesn’t go back to the police, it goes to the local council authority, yet the police are expected to uphold these new ideas/laws. They simply wouldn’t have the hours in a day to stop everyone who speeds these days. My commute to work is different roads, from 30mph through to dual carriageway, and I could safely say that 80% plus of road users completely ignore the legal speed limits.

Concentrate on stopping people using their phones/smoking/wanking/shaving/putting makeup on (not all at the same time), and introduce higher standards needed to pass the driving test. Also I think competency based/stupidity test should be required to pass and get a driving licence. Some of the oxygen thieves you see behind the wheel really shouldn’t be there....

PC_Dave

Ravenous said:

  ...now go 5/10% below to compensate - it already happens with the roads full of incompetence and driving 46mph in a 50mph on an A road between towns

I hear this a lot - can someone explain to me what the actual danger is of people going a bit below the speed limit? (Annoying someone does not count.)

It’s called not making adequate progress and can actually be dealt with with a higher fine/points than speeding - it has a knock on to the traffic behind, not to mention people taking unecessary risks overtaking etc.  

Emp_Fab

Ridiculous idea.  "Zero Tolerance" on something like that is just idiotic.

Dominic

Luminous said:

I haven't heard the the original article but totally agree...if you speed you are a selfish git, no ones journey is more important than anyone else's. ( bar ambulances etc. )....I would make speeding in residential areas a crime of manslaughter. Running red lights should be instant loss of driving priveleges ( unless you can prove it was unsafe to do stop )

I bet you are bags of fun at a party !

Phil_aka_Pip

I'd scrap speed limits, re-define what "dangerous driving" is to include excessive speed (if necessary), and enforce those laws more rigorously. To say you're "safe" at 29 or 30mph and unsafe at 31 is totally ludicrous, whereas it's possible to act the twat at any speed below or above 30mph.

Dominic

TTony said:

guitars4you said:

 the J Vine Radio 2 show

There's your problem.

How BBC standards have fallen.    That show is  sensationalist, populist radio at its worst.  Maybe expected on a local radio station with 3 listeners, but on the BBC? 

Poor old Jimmy Young must be spinning at 78rpm.

I have found him and his show to be a horrible sanctimonious twat .......he pursued proceedings against the girl driver he had an altercation with until she was imprisoned..........hope he is pleased with himself

EricTheWeary

You can't go zero tolerance on something that's unenforceable. 
I'm quite happy to see traffic calming measures which haven't been as embraced here as in other parts of Europe. Also was interesting watching that TV show about pollution in Birmingham and how much you can control the flow of traffic in built up areas by reprogramming the traffic lights.
Whole bunch of things you can do without needing more police or more speed cameras. Needs local councils and planners to take the initiative more than the police really. 

Bezzer

Phil_aka_Pip said:

I'd scrap speed limits, re-define what "dangerous driving" is to include excessive speed (if necessary), and enforce those laws more rigorously. To say you're "safe" at 29 or 30mph and unsafe at 31 is totally ludicrous, whereas it's possible to act the twat at any speed below or above 30mph.

To be fair, I support a zero tolerance approach to speed.  Its been in place in south wales for a while, and in a few other areas (tolerance levels are set by the police force in the district).  It's less about "dangerous" as yes, you can be dangerous at 10mph but even a couple mph over 30 can drastically increase stopping distance, therefore making any incident inherently more dangerous.  According to standard calculation, 30 would be 9m+14m (thinking + braking) and 33 (well under the old 10%+2 nonsense) would be 10m+17m ... 4m extra, doesn't seem like a lot ... but bear in mind braking is not linear, most of the drop off is at the end, that's a big zone to hit someone in still going at a damaging rate.

I've been done for speeding so I'm not preaching ... I do see why you'd crack down where it simple to do so though.  Also agree there should be more visable police.

57Deluxe

strtdv said:

57Deluxe said:

you can do more than 30 on a bicycle - well I could. I used to chase the Bus from Walton to Addlestone cos was always two top totties sitting on the back seat waving and blowing kisses at me after a night out...

Speed limits don't apply to bicycles (they only apply to motor vehicles), but you knew that of course..

yeah but yeah - you try stopping on a sixpence on a cycle going at 30mph - can still do signif damage to yourself, others and ppl's garden fences...

Dominic

.......more speed ,more fun
speed limits are for the plebs who can't afford Bentley,Aston,Porsche or Ferrari
If they can't afford a fast car and keep up the pace they should be forced into slave labour maintaining perfect road surfaces for  those with the right toys. and the benefit of their enjoyment .........and made to work 24 hours a day without a break .
A small detachment should be set aside as a special task force for Valeting the cars of the more fortunate so they always look their best.
Those older disenfranchised individuals should be made to donate their living bodies to crash test research for the enhancement of the safety aspects of the elite brands.
There should be a minimum speed limit for sure .....150 mph on motorways ; a bit less for built up areas
If I was able to afford a Ferrari I would drive everywhere absolutely as fast as I could or I wouldn't feel I was getting my money's worth. ......otherwise it's like having a girthy 9 " Cock but being incurably impotent.
That's all I gotta say 'bout that!

webrthomson

guitars4you said:

2nd thought is this is just an extra cash cow

I'd say that one is the answer

ThePrettyDamned

As ever, I suppose the answer is to just .. Not speed.

At the same time, don't drive dangerously.

Don't eat, smoke, do make up. 

Basically, drive safely at or below the limit as needed and you will not fall foul. I would like to see more police on the roads to assess stuff other than speed.

PC_Dave said:

Ravenous said:

  ...now go 5/10% below to compensate - it already happens with the roads full of incompetence and driving 46mph in a 50mph on an A road between towns

I hear this a lot - can someone explain to me what the actual danger is of people going a bit below the speed limit? (Annoying someone does not count.)

It’s called not making adequate progress and can actually be dealt with with a higher fine/points than speeding - it has a knock on to the traffic behind, not to mention people taking unecessary risks overtaking etc.  

Is someone going 3-4mph the cause of someone else taking an unnecessary risk?

I agree slow driving can be dangerous. 

RiftAmps

I'd support a zero-tolerance policy on speeding, along with yearly driving tests and much smaller drink-drive limit (0mg if it were my call). If you can't control a vehicle within the defines of the law, you shouldn't be driving.

When I want to drive fast, I book a track-day or an hour at the local go-kart track. Many, many times more fun than breaking the speed limit by 5%.

guitars4you

Ravenous said:

  ...now go 5/10% below to compensate - it already happens with the roads full of incompetence and driving 46mph in a 50mph on an A road between towns

I hear this a lot - can someone explain to me what the actual danger is of people going a bit below the speed limit? (Annoying someone does not count.)

One annoying issue with this and it happens many times - they drive at 46 or so in a 50 - then enter a 40mph zone and carry on at 46 - just incompetence on both counts - totally unaware of what is going on around them

Sassafras

57Deluxe said:

you can do more than 30 on a bicycle - well I could. I used to chase the Bus from Walton to Addlestone cos was always two top totties sitting on the back seat waving and blowing kisses at me after a night out...

Stalking is covered by different laws.

Dominic

webrthomson said:

guitars4you said:

2nd thought is this is just an extra cash cow

I'd say that one is the answer

Spot on.......my sons friend was a bit tipsy last weekend but not a nuisance.....he left a club and took a 14" dance stick (it's like one of those little wands with a ribbon on the end that Gymnastics girls use ) anyway,stopped by Police who found it "on his person "and want to fine him for carrying and concealing an offensive weapon !!!!!!
 Shame he didn't have his Harry Potter invisibility cape too ! Anything to rinse a few quid on a fine.
 Friend was taken to court (he is a carpet fitter ) because he was stopped outside a house where he was working whilst going to his van and searched -of course he had a Stanley knife with a hooked carpet fitting blade.in a work tool-belt holster......he explained he was a carpet fitter, showed rolls of gripper, underlay and carpet in the van and the house he was working on .
 The tried to prosecute for carrying a " Long handled knife with a shanked blade " ( A Stanley Knife !!!!!) but they cleverly refused to describe as such. Talk about selling a Hamburger and calling it Steak !
 Yes,he got it thrown out after getting a lawyer ...........lot of very worrying Police and CPS behaviour of late.
He is Black ...........it reminds me of the Mel Smith sketch from the 80s where they try to arrest a Black guy for any reason but he has a good excuse so in desperation they charge him with wearing a "Loud shirt in a built-up area "

Fretwired

ICBM said:

I know I will be unpopular for saying this, but I would be in favour of it. There's no point in having rules that are constantly broken with impunity. I'm not in favour of raising the motorway limit "to compensate" either - what's so special about 80? Just drive at 70, you'll get there in almost exactly the same time but waste less fuel. I normally drive at around 60, it's noticeably more efficient and only adds about 5 minutes to my 50-mile commute.

I commuted around the M25 for five years in the rush hour - a nightmare. And then the variable speed limits were introduced and guess what? People got places quicker. It stopped the whizzing round at 70 mph followed by the heavy breaking and the concertina effect that causes jams and accidents. There were a few arseholes who didn't get it but to regular commuters it was a welcomed introduction. Drive slower, get there faster, burn less petrol and create less pollution.

mart

TTony said:
...

Poor old Jimmy Young must be spinning at 78rpm.

If he is he'd better watch out otherwise he'll get a speeding ticket.