Quizzes & Puzzles1 min ago
Cameras?
What is it with some drivers and speed cameras? I drive long distances, regularly ,and it doens't matter where speed cameras are positioned; insight or out of sight, because they enter into my life. No-one who drives properly should care about them.
If you do speed, or drive dangerously, then I'd prefer that you weren' t on the road. By the way, I'm not an an over- cautious driver.
If you do speed, or drive dangerously, then I'd prefer that you weren' t on the road. By the way, I'm not an an over- cautious driver.
Answers
1 to 20 of 20
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by Brownlow. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
People seem to misunderstand what a speed limit is. It isn't a suggested speed at which you can travel, it is the fastest that you may travel on a particular road. You can drive more slowly, if you like, but you must not drive faster. If you do decide to drive faster, and get caught, you're fined for committing a crime. It's as simple as that.
Perhaps the question is aimed at people who exceed the posted speed limit by quite a lot........why do you drive above the legal limit?
Yes I would agree that most of us at some time exceed the limit by a few mile per hour, but 40 in a 30 limit and 50 in a 40 is not a few. Most speedometers are out and read higher than actual speed but that is not an exuse for exceeding the limit by 10 or 15 mph.
Yes I would agree that most of us at some time exceed the limit by a few mile per hour, but 40 in a 30 limit and 50 in a 40 is not a few. Most speedometers are out and read higher than actual speed but that is not an exuse for exceeding the limit by 10 or 15 mph.
Brownlow - I think I've caught your angle here. Is your basic question about how to catch the drivers who flaunt many or all of the 'rules of the road'? I too, drive carefully with consideration for all other road users about me in the UK and I get slightly concerned with the drivers that have no apparent regard for other road users. I don't let it bother me.
I've driven in many other countries and have learned to lose the "I'm in the right" attitude and just go for the space when it appears - especially in Italy - but how can you enforce a rule or law in the UK that you were "out of order" there? I've been caught for speeding twice in 30 years but they were in 'no problem' situations - fair cop - but I was not out of order bearing the locality and the road conditions at the time. If only there was a rule like for driving like a plonker that was easily enforceable then I would go for that but how could it be enforced fairly?
I've driven in many other countries and have learned to lose the "I'm in the right" attitude and just go for the space when it appears - especially in Italy - but how can you enforce a rule or law in the UK that you were "out of order" there? I've been caught for speeding twice in 30 years but they were in 'no problem' situations - fair cop - but I was not out of order bearing the locality and the road conditions at the time. If only there was a rule like for driving like a plonker that was easily enforceable then I would go for that but how could it be enforced fairly?
I don't have a fundamental problem with speed cameras per se although I do think that on occasion they should be set with a slightly higher margin 33 in a 30 for example is not a significant contribution to road safety when considering the variation of road condition diver capibility and car condition.
I do have a major problem with the current system of totting up camera points on a single journey.
As the system now stands you can leave home with a clean license and arrive at your destination with enough points for a ban with no warning in between.
The whole purpose of the points system is to give drivers a warning and chance to modify their behaviour prior to disqualification and the existing system makes a mockery of that.
You should be "finable" but not incur additional points from a camera until you've at least been sent a notice of intended prosecution from the last offense.
I do have a major problem with the current system of totting up camera points on a single journey.
As the system now stands you can leave home with a clean license and arrive at your destination with enough points for a ban with no warning in between.
The whole purpose of the points system is to give drivers a warning and chance to modify their behaviour prior to disqualification and the existing system makes a mockery of that.
You should be "finable" but not incur additional points from a camera until you've at least been sent a notice of intended prosecution from the last offense.
Ok, so we all know the laws about speeding, but speed is not the major contributor to most accidents, it is driving too fast for the road conditions, so in theory, speed limits should be reduced/increased depending on weather etc.
There are roads by me where it's perfectly safe to drive at 70 in the dry, but would be suicidal to drive over 50 in the wet. Only the first is against the law, yet only the second is dangerous.
There's a fundamental problem with prosecuting people based on speed alone, but unfortunately, as yet, there is no better way of attempting to make the roads safer.
Incidentally, I have a clean licence touch wood despite regularly driving long distances and occasionally brekaing the speed limit.
I sometimes feel that so many speed cameras contribute to more accidents than they prevent, with people so pre-occupied with watching their speedos and looking out for cameras rather than watching the road. And as for people who slow down for cameras even though they weren't breaking the speed limit in the first place....
There are roads by me where it's perfectly safe to drive at 70 in the dry, but would be suicidal to drive over 50 in the wet. Only the first is against the law, yet only the second is dangerous.
There's a fundamental problem with prosecuting people based on speed alone, but unfortunately, as yet, there is no better way of attempting to make the roads safer.
Incidentally, I have a clean licence touch wood despite regularly driving long distances and occasionally brekaing the speed limit.
I sometimes feel that so many speed cameras contribute to more accidents than they prevent, with people so pre-occupied with watching their speedos and looking out for cameras rather than watching the road. And as for people who slow down for cameras even though they weren't breaking the speed limit in the first place....
Thanks, everyone, for your input. I did ask a question about why some drivers have a thing about an instrument which, if they follow the ground rules shouldn't effect them. I was not making any point, but simply asking a simple question, regarding a problem which confounds me.There have been lots of good comments, none that really answers my question, though. Norman the dog, and maviscoull, in particular, seemingly, have no idea what I was asking. Well, surely that's their own fault for not reading, or understanding, the question. Dan no 1: I often drive faster than my top speed, but as that is normally below the speed limit, anyway, I've allowed for that.
So, I suppose that we ought to consider the matter closed.
So, I suppose that we ought to consider the matter closed.
Hedgehog - when you say you concentrate on your speed do you mean you are always looking at your speedo?
Personally, I'd feel much safer being in a car with a driver doing 90 in a 70 who was concentrating on the road than somebody doing 70 in a 70 who had their eyes glued to their speedo! Just a thought.
These cameras have absolutely nothing, nothing to do with safety, and to suggest such is naive - they are there solely to raise revenue: they are tax collectors just as much as HM Inland Revenue are.
They are arbitrary - they will catch somebody doing 55 on a 50 dual carriageway even though that person may be travelling on a clear dry moonlit night in excellent conditions in a safe car on a deserted road - him doing 5mph over the limit in such a scenario is not dangerous, and to suggest anything otherwise is absurdity in the extreme.
Meanwhile, just behind him doing 49 in a 50 is a chavved up un-mot'd Nova with an underage uninsured driver weaving all over the road whilst drunk and stoned -he, of course, doesn't get flashed.
As I say - NOTHING to do with safety.
What we need is more police presence on our roads.
Personally, I'd feel much safer being in a car with a driver doing 90 in a 70 who was concentrating on the road than somebody doing 70 in a 70 who had their eyes glued to their speedo! Just a thought.
These cameras have absolutely nothing, nothing to do with safety, and to suggest such is naive - they are there solely to raise revenue: they are tax collectors just as much as HM Inland Revenue are.
They are arbitrary - they will catch somebody doing 55 on a 50 dual carriageway even though that person may be travelling on a clear dry moonlit night in excellent conditions in a safe car on a deserted road - him doing 5mph over the limit in such a scenario is not dangerous, and to suggest anything otherwise is absurdity in the extreme.
Meanwhile, just behind him doing 49 in a 50 is a chavved up un-mot'd Nova with an underage uninsured driver weaving all over the road whilst drunk and stoned -he, of course, doesn't get flashed.
As I say - NOTHING to do with safety.
What we need is more police presence on our roads.
flip-flop you say that speed cameras are arbitrary. Well speed limits are not. You might not agree with them but if you break them you run the risk of being caught. Personally, I don't have a problem with them and I don't see why they should be painted bright colours. I've no objection to them being camouflaged. I'm not saying that I never speed but if I get caught I will just hold up my hands and get on with it.
Ugly Bob - good point. Brownlow, you indicate that you set yourself a top speed that is below the speed limit, and usually aim to drive below that top speed!! Given that your car speedo will probably show a speed about 5mph under the actual speed limit, do you not feel that is irresponsible?
I have been driving for 11 years and (touch wood) have never had an accident, as I pay attention, have good control of my car and drive at a speed safe for the conditions. My time is precious to me, and if I am stuck behind some idiot doing 25 in a 30, or 40 in a 60 then it is going to annoy me. It is that sort of driving that causes people to overtake at dangerous times, and is far more of a problem than somone doing 60 in a 50.
I also get frustrated by the person who does 40 in a 60, then carries on at 40 when the limit drops to 30!
I try to drive at 30 in a 30, but personally I think the motorway speed limit should be 90-100. with 80-90 on decent duel carriage ways.
I have been caught speeding by the way. It was the one and only time I drove over 100 on a public road, was 2 am on a straight completely clear stretch of duel carriage way, and the camera was hidden in a bush. There was no danger to anyone else. The total cost to me will ultimately run to several thousand pounds.
I have been driving for 11 years and (touch wood) have never had an accident, as I pay attention, have good control of my car and drive at a speed safe for the conditions. My time is precious to me, and if I am stuck behind some idiot doing 25 in a 30, or 40 in a 60 then it is going to annoy me. It is that sort of driving that causes people to overtake at dangerous times, and is far more of a problem than somone doing 60 in a 50.
I also get frustrated by the person who does 40 in a 60, then carries on at 40 when the limit drops to 30!
I try to drive at 30 in a 30, but personally I think the motorway speed limit should be 90-100. with 80-90 on decent duel carriage ways.
I have been caught speeding by the way. It was the one and only time I drove over 100 on a public road, was 2 am on a straight completely clear stretch of duel carriage way, and the camera was hidden in a bush. There was no danger to anyone else. The total cost to me will ultimately run to several thousand pounds.
Brownlows question,hm driving dangerously,how is that policed then,how are those who indicate after going round a corner brought to book,or those who are about to join the carriageway from a slip road , staring inanely to their left ,showing no signs that they are aware that traffic is careering toward them from their right ,or those who force you to shift to the fast lane from motorway slip roads even when the driver in the fast lane shows complete disregard for the unfolding scenario,it seems to me that straight lines are ok for most drivers,its only when they have to attempt to use discretion and courtesy that everything else falls apart,unfortunately for,on the most part the compos mentis driver your judgement re speed must be governed to such tight limits that ER hits the jackpot every time,the are not safety devices,the are government slot machines,yet another device to milk the motorist,I live on a council estate where I regularly watch from my window cabbages in corsas careering down my street at breakneck speeds,yet WE dont have a speed camera,Hm, I wonder why,get real browntrousers.
1 to 20 of 20
Latest Posts
Quizzes & Puzzles10 mins ago
News12 mins ago
Strands#265 Did You Hear That?
Quizzes & Puzzles12 mins ago
Quizzes & Puzzles13 mins ago
Quizzes & Puzzles22 mins ago
