# Speed Limits - How do you slow down?



## Starbuck88 (Nov 12, 2013)

Hi All,

So just as a bit of a debate. Here in Newquay we've had an operation to target speeding and educate on the dangers of speeding.

The headlines have been bandied about today, 200 speedsters caught in ONE day.

One of the locations, was not far past where it changes from 60mph to 30mph. Where the location the speed trap was, time of measurement would have been no more than 100feet max, into the lower speed limit.

When I was taught to drive, I was taught that where a speed goes from higher to lower and there are rumble strips, lines, speed painted on the road etc, you needed to be at the lower speed before entering. (I hate to use these words considering current UK affairs but like a Hard Border)

However, if there were no such road markings, just the signs on the posts, you start to slow down before you enter but gradually with traffic meaning you would enter the 30mph zone still over the limit but keep slowing until you get to 30, in a reasonable time. (Soft Border).

I've looked into the highway code and it doesn't say how you should approach changing speed limits and I can't make head nor tail of the Road Traffic Act.

What do you do, Honestly?

https://www.cornwalllive.com/news/cornwall-news/newquay-police-speedwatch-catch-nearly-1666379


----------



## RandomlySet (Jul 10, 2007)

Honestly, as soon as you pass the 30 sign, you should be doing 30... Generally though, most road here are likely to go from 60 to 50 to 30. Or maybe 60 to 40. But can't think of any 60 to 30 areas here...


----------



## RaceGlazer (Jan 10, 2007)

60 to 30 looks like an attempt at revenue generating to me. Or a lot of rear enders.


----------



## Guest (Jun 12, 2018)

The rumble strips are there to wake you up .

As above, when entering a lower speed area you should be doing no more than that speed when passing the sign.
When entering a higher speed area, you should not accelerate until past the sign.

In other words, the lower speed always takes precedence.


----------



## Guest (Jun 12, 2018)

60 to 30 is very common, surely. Single carriageway NSL to built-up area.


----------



## Bill58 (Jul 5, 2010)

I live in a rural area and it's all 60 to 30 and 30 to 60 as you pass through villages.


----------



## Stoner (Jun 25, 2010)

My area is similar - lots of 50mph's down to 30. We have the same issue where the Police set the camera's just inside the lower limit. I know that you should be doing the correct (or below) speed when you pass the sign but it's ridiculous to drop 20mph in such a short distance. In fact, if you did, and someone rear ended you, you'd probably get done for driving without due care and attention.

We all know there has to be some rules to keep the roads safe, but the method they use to enforce the law is simply a revenue generating exercise and no thought given to safety


----------



## Kerr (Mar 27, 2012)

RaceGlazer said:


> 60 to 30 looks like an attempt at revenue generating to me. Or a lot of rear enders.


Lots of roads up here lead to little villages and towns. Going from 60mph down to 30mph is common. It really shouldn't cause any driver an issue. It would be inexcusable to crash in such circumstances.

I usually lift off a little in advance and brake smoothly before the sign.


----------



## muzzer (Feb 13, 2011)

I just slow down, its not difficult for me


----------



## Guest (Jun 12, 2018)

Stoner said:


> I know that you should be doing the correct (or below) speed when you pass the sign but it's ridiculous to drop 20mph in such a short distance. In fact, if you did, and someone rear ended you, you'd probably get done for driving without due care and attention.


But you know a change in limit is approaching. You'll probably see buildings and street lamps long before you see an actual speed limit sign.


----------



## muzzer (Feb 13, 2011)

Stoner said:


> My area is similar - lots of 50mph's down to 30. We have the same issue where the Police set the camera's just inside the lower limit. I know that you should be doing the correct (or below) speed when you pass the sign but it's ridiculous to drop 20mph in such a short distance. In fact, if you did, and someone rear ended you, you'd probably get done for driving without due care and attention.
> 
> We all know there has to be some rules to keep the roads safe, but the method they use to enforce the law is simply a revenue generating exercise and no thought given to safety


It doesn't matter if you slow down rapidly and someone hits you in the tail, it's their fault not yours. No matter the circumstances. 
I once had someone stop in a roundabout to answer their phone, i was rolling forward and scoping the traffic on the roundabout, or lack of it, looked away for 5 seconds, looked back and was into the back of her car.

Insurance ruled in her favour despite her stopping to answer her phone.


----------



## Soul boy 68 (Sep 8, 2013)

I agree with all that is said, I have my trusty road Angel to alert and remind me of speed limits and cameras that are dotted about all over the UK. With so many different speed limits it can be easy to get caught out and especially on unfamiliar roads.


----------



## muzzer (Feb 13, 2011)

Soul boy 68 said:


> I agree with all that is said, I have my trusty road Angel to alert and remind me of speed limits and cameras that are dotted about all over the UK. With so many different speed limits it can be easy to get caught out and especially on unfamiliar roads.
> 
> View attachment 54346


My car tells me what the speed limit is on the dashboard but i keep my eyes open when driving


----------



## Soul boy 68 (Sep 8, 2013)

muzzer said:


> My car tells me what the speed limit is on the dashboard but i keep my eyes open when driving


That works for me too,  Maybe what I said didn't come across how I intended. But I'm sure you get the gist of it.


----------



## muzzer (Feb 13, 2011)

Soul boy 68 said:


> That works for me too,  Maybe what I said didn't come across how I intended. But I'm sure you get the gist of it.


:lol: :lol: :lol: i just realised what i typed


----------



## andy665 (Nov 1, 2005)

A bit of common sense and awareness means you are at or beneath the speed limit s you reach the sign - it's not difficult


----------



## Naddy37 (Oct 27, 2005)

Starbuck88 said:


> When I was taught to drive, I was taught that where a speed goes from higher to lower and there are rumble strips, lines, speed painted on the road etc, you needed to be at the lower speed before entering. (I hate to use these words considering current UK affairs but like a Hard Border)
> 
> However, if there were no such road markings, just the signs on the posts, you start to slow down before you enter but gradually with traffic meaning you would enter the 30mph zone still over the limit but keep slowing until you get to 30, in a reasonable time. (Soft Border).


Regardless of no road markings or not, you need to be doing the speed indicated on the road sign when you pass it, not over it.

There are plenty of indicators to show a change in the speed limit approaching, lamp posts, houses, change of hazard lines from short to long etc, etc.

I got told while doing my advanced driving course, if you have rumble strips on the approach, then at the start of the strips, you need to be 'off the power' so the car is starting to slow down smoothly.

You don't want to be slamming on the brakes at the last minute to loose the speed. A quick brush of the brakes to loose the speed is fine, but slamming on the brakes is not, shows you're not paying attention, it's uncomfortable for the passengers, and car is unstable!

You need to be matching your speed to the speed limit sign at the exact point you pass it.


----------



## Darlofan (Nov 24, 2010)

Lots of 60 to 30 round here too in rural N Wales. Speed van sits in a regular spot about 3miles from us about 100yds from the national speed sign. You turn off the main road into a country lane do 200yds then round a bend where it goes to national speed Locals know it but obviously very lucrative catching all the tourists! 
Never see him in our village though where a few of the villagers could do with a nice shock😂
A lot of average cameras just gone up in a 15mile section of the country roads due to number of accidents, mainly motorbikes as it's one of those nice open roads that the bikers like. Unfortunately the cameras point out of the zones so don't catch motorbike plates as they enter the zone!!


----------



## kingswood (Jun 23, 2016)

Bill58 said:


> I live in a rural area and it's all 60 to 30 and 30 to 60 as you pass through villages.


plenty of these in yorkshire.

same as above, be doing 30 when u pass the sign - good brakes and tyres to slow from 60.

then on the reverse out the village foot to the floor when passed the 30 up to 60, both exhausts and 24 valves singing, fly by the slow accelerators and all perfectly legal as under the limit.

speed van man can smoke it


----------



## Radish293 (Mar 16, 2012)

This is from the ACPO Police Guidelines from 2002 which has not been updated but is generally considered to the working guide.

1.9 Does proximity to the start or the end of a speed limit on a particular section of road have any operational significance?

A speed limit starts or ends at the exact point on a road indicated by the relevant signs. There is no legal bar to the enforcement of a speed limit from that exact point. There are however operational constraints dependent on the device used. ACPO will not specify a minimum distance from the start or end of a speed limit from which enforcement can place. Enforcement may only take place where the operator is absolutely positive, and a court may subsequently be certain, the whole of the measurement of the speed took place within the speed limit. If there is any chance, whatsoever, that any of the measurement took place, or could have taken place, outside of the speed limit then that measurement will be disregarded.

Full document available 
http://www.ukspeedtraps.co.uk/rept2005.pdf

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## petemattw (Nov 3, 2008)

you should be looking down the road enough to identify a change in speed witout it being a surprise.

Once you've identified a change in speed limit check your rear view mirrors. Lift off the gas allowing speed to bleed off naturally, maybe add a touch of break to bring the vehicle to the correct speed on entering the new limit area as you pass the sign. Back on with positive throttle to maintain appropriate speed. If you are struggling with this try and IAM or ROSPA advanced driving course.

My friends all want to know why I don't have points on my licence, it's beacuse I use a little trick called keeping within the limits of the law, this is supplemented by ensuring that when I drive I give it my focus, not just the minimum to get by. Driving down the A5 at legal limits on Sunday I passed loads of cars who tried to race me on the straights but couldn't maintain the speed in the bends. Practise and then practise more at being a good driver


----------



## Mikesphotaes (Jul 24, 2016)

It probably is still called "Acceleration Sense", simply check mirrors and lift off the gas at the correct point and you will sail through the limit markers at the correct speed.

Mind you it takes a bit of practice!

Still laughing at the poster who thinks 60 to 30 limit is a money grabber!


----------



## Mugwump (Feb 17, 2008)

Mikesphotaes said:


> Still laughing at the poster who thinks 60 to 30 limit is a money grabber!


Me too - I imagine we are probably both old enough to remember when 40 and 50mph zones were a bit of a rarity, and almost all restricted limit areas were directly from 60 down to 30 on entering what was at the time termed a 'built-up area'.

It also amused me somewhat that it was suggested that a car rear-ending the car in front which had suddenly slammed his brakes on could be blamed on the car in front - the law says it is always the fault of the driver behind. The vast majority of drivers don't seem to have even a rough appreciation of how long it takes to stop their car from any given speed.


----------



## kingswood (Jun 23, 2016)

petemattw said:


> you should be looking down the road enough to identify a change in speed witout it being a surprise.
> 
> Once you've identified a change in speed limit check your rear view mirrors. Lift off the gas allowing speed to bleed off naturally, maybe add a touch of break to bring the vehicle to the correct speed on entering the new limit area as you pass the sign. Back on with positive throttle to maintain appropriate speed. If you are struggling with this try and IAM or ROSPA advanced driving course.
> 
> *My friends all want to know why I don't have points on my licence,* it's beacuse I use a little trick called keeping within the limits of the law, this is supplemented by ensuring that when I drive I give it my focus, not just the minimum to get by. Driving down the A5 at legal limits on Sunday I passed loads of cars who tried to race me on the straights but couldn't maintain the speed in the bends. Practise and then practise more at being a good driver


bet ur a blast at a dinner party

rules are there to be broken, live alittle - you may enjoy it! :thumb:


----------



## Naddy37 (Oct 27, 2005)

kingswood said:


> bet ur a blast at a dinner party
> 
> rules are there to be broken, live alittle - you may enjoy it! :thumb:


So just for a laugh you'd quite happily break a speed limit? 

Speed limits are there for a reason.


----------



## Darlofan (Nov 24, 2010)

Mikesphotaes said:


> It probably is still called "Acceleration Sense", simply check mirrors and lift off the gas at the correct point and you will sail through the limit markers at the correct speed.
> 
> Mind you it takes a bit of practice!
> 
> Still laughing at the poster who thinks 60 to 30 limit is a money grabber!


I think most people know speed cameras are there to raise money. There are numerous sites round N Wales where the van sits which have no need for it. The one I quoted in an earlier post has no reason for being there. There is a notorious accident spot where there have been several fatalities and even more severe accidents on the A483 by Wrexham on a bridge crossing the valley. Speed van is never there but sits about a mile further up the road where the single carriageway becomes dual up the hill. Clearly catching drivers who are overtaking on a safer part of the road where there's never an accident.

No points here btw.


----------



## Mikesphotaes (Jul 24, 2016)

Darlofan said:


> I think most people know speed cameras are there to raise money. There are numerous sites round N Wales where the van sits which have no need for it. The one I quoted in an earlier post has no reason for being there. There is a notorious accident spot where there have been several fatalities and even more severe accidents on the A483 by Wrexham on a bridge crossing the valley. Speed van is never there but sits about a mile further up the road where the single carriageway becomes dual up the hill. Clearly catching drivers who are overtaking on a safer part of the road where there's never an accident.
> 
> No points here btw.


Totally agree about the "Safety Cameras", my point was thinking 60 to 30 mph was absolutely anything to do with revenue!


----------



## kingswood (Jun 23, 2016)

Naddy37 said:


> So just for a laugh you'd quite happily break a speed limit?
> 
> Speed limits are there for a reason.


i break them regulary. and its fun. and safe. speed doesnt kill, stupidity does.

speed limits are there for one reason, for people to stupid to judge the conditions.

cars have improved in all manners of saftey and stopping since the 70mph was introduced. granted peoples reactions times havnt changed much since we were been chased by dinosaurs but if 70mph was 'safe' in the 70's with all round drums and your face as the crumple zone then the limit needs re-looking at now.

for those speed limit lovers answer me one question and i'll do all the speed limits in the land:

'why do i have to do 20mph going past a primary school at 2am in the morning?'


----------



## RandomlySet (Jul 10, 2007)

kingswood said:


> i break them regulary. and its fun. and safe. speed doesnt kill, stupidity does.
> 
> speed limits are there for one reason, for people to stupid to judge the conditions.
> 
> ...


As opposed to the other 2am?

(sorry, I couldn't resist :lol


----------



## Darlofan (Nov 24, 2010)

kingswood said:


> i break them regulary. and its fun. and safe. speed doesnt kill, stupidity does.
> 
> speed limits are there for one reason, for people to stupid to judge the conditions.
> 
> ...


Next village to us has 20mph zone by the primary school. It closed over 2 years ago😂 Still 20 though!


----------



## Cookies (Dec 10, 2008)

It’s easy to anticipate changes to limits in areas I’m familiar with. It’s also easy to become complacent and drift into the 30 at a higher speed. Cameras are absolute. Road policing tends to be less so, in appropriate circumstances, obviously. 

While I agree with a lot of what has been said above, I think it’s inappropriate speed that kills, whether that’s 90 on a B road, or 20 on a motorway, both are considerable hazards that cause issues for other road users. Everyone should think about other road users at all times when driving. 

The number of people who don’t indicate on roundabouts, for example, is just staggering, but that’s what happens when you replace good, old-fashioned policing with cameras. 

Cheers,

Cooks


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## alan hanson (May 21, 2008)

kingswood said:


> i break them regulary. and its fun. and safe. speed doesnt kill, stupidity does.
> 
> speed limits are there for one reason, for people to stupid to judge the conditions.
> 
> ...


Totally agree with this but, and its a huge but, if we raise the speed limits as i think they should be it just encourages the idiots who as you say can not engage brain and evaluate the conditions and judge what is safe just to go even faster and be more dangerous.

Pretty much like anything in life the possibilities are there for it to be better but we/some will only go and spoil it for everyone through selfishness.

i'd rather have more unmarked cars on the road pulling people for stupid/careless driving


----------



## andy665 (Nov 1, 2005)

kingswood said:


> i break them regulary. and its fun. and safe. speed doesnt kill, stupidity does.
> 
> speed limits are there for one reason, for people to stupid to judge the conditions.
> 
> ...


I personally find that view plain wrong. We live in a country that has a democratically elected government that makes laws - I am not arrogant enough to think that I can abide by some and ignore those that I think are wrong.

Based on your thinking I assume it would be ok for me to come around and slash your tyres if I don't believe the laws on criminal damage are fair or reasonable.

Perhaps if a friend or relative of yours was killed or injured by a driver "who knew better" then you might have a different point of view

I'm not saying that all speed limits are appropriate - far from it - but they are what they are


----------



## wish wash (Aug 25, 2011)

I drive through a village which is a 20mph zone. When the zone ends and goes back to 30mph is where the primary school is. This makes no sense to me. The rules are the rules, people ignore them as people don't think they'll get caught and I think it's human nature not liking being told what to do.


----------



## andy665 (Nov 1, 2005)

wish wash said:


> I drive through a village which is a 20mph zone. When the zone ends and goes back to 30mph is where the primary school is. This makes no sense to me. The rules are the rules, people ignore them as people don't think they'll get caught and I think it's human nature not liking being told what to do.


Id rather be told what do than have points on my licence or the injury / death of an innocent person on my conscience


----------



## petemattw (Nov 3, 2008)

kingswood said:


> bet ur a blast at a dinner party
> 
> rules are there to be broken, live alittle - you may enjoy it! :thumb:


I break the rules when i've got the blue lights on! No need to risk my licence needlessly...

If I want to seriously play i'll take my toys to the track.


----------



## Caledoniandream (Oct 9, 2009)

kingswood said:


> bet ur a blast at a dinner party
> 
> rules are there to be broken, live alittle - you may enjoy it! :thumb:


No, I am very boring at a dinner party, but alive.
Where do you draw the line, me nicking your car, because I like to live on the edge, and like to drive around in other peoples cars? 
It breakes the rules, but heho lets live a bit.

Speedlimits are not only for your benefit / annoyance, there are other people on the road.
Unexperienced drivers, older drivers, vehicles that are substantial slower than your 24 valve smoker. 
Farm vehicles pulling out of side roads / fields. 
1000's of reasons for a speed limit, not always to be understood or seen at a glance, but mainly there is a good reason. 
Living not far from the "Evo Triangle" seen soem horendous accidents, with people who think they can drive. 
Every weekend when the weather is dry, the ambulances and air ambulances are several times out (A5, Horseshoe pass). 
And while I agree it's not always the direct fault of the speeder, but you don't always expect to be overtaken by twice the speed limit when you are making a turn. 
Yes I have been caught speeding, hold my hands up, but I don't see it as a moneymaker, I was wrong and broke the law. 
Don't do the crime if you can't do the time. 
Speed doesn't kill, but circumstances do, the speed only makes the different, no how they find you, but where they find you.

Ever seen a car hitting a truck at 100mph, the people where capitated, not a seight you easyy forget.


----------



## Mugwump (Feb 17, 2008)

Darlofan said:


> I think most people know speed cameras are there to raise money.


If that were the case, why do drivers keep feeding them??? They raise money purely because dome drivers are plain stupid and seem to think speed limits are optional, and thus keep giving them the opportunity to part them from their hard-earned. Totally self-inflicted.

If everyone kept to the speed limits, they would generate no revenue at all.


----------



## kingswood (Jun 23, 2016)

petemattw said:


> I break the rules when i've got the blue lights on! No need to risk my licence needlessly...
> 
> If I want to seriously play i'll take my toys to the track.


and how many ppl have been killed/injured by speeding emergency vechiles?

and your 'IAM or ROSPA' trained so please explain to me the 20mph past the school at 2am?! the answer is your an educated person and know there isnt any satisfactory answer.

ps - sorry for the bashing but saying you drive with blues is asking for it :lol:


----------



## andy665 (Nov 1, 2005)

kingswood said:


> please explain to me the 20mph past the school at 2am?! the answer is your an educated person and know there isnt any satisfactory answer.


The technology exists to have variable speed limits - are you prepared to pay for it?

I'd rather see my money spent on education, the NHS than to save 10-15 seconds by being to pass a school at a higher speed at 2am in the morning.


----------



## tosh (Dec 30, 2005)

This is why (3m13s)






Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


----------



## garycha (Mar 29, 2012)

kingswood said:


> 'why do i have to do 20mph going past a primary school at 2am in the morning?'


Simple reason is that many schools are based in residential areas, where there may still be person-activity 24/7, plus at 20mph cars do make less tyre and engine noise, so the rest can get better sleep.

We like to thin that our cars are so much quieter these days. They are, but only from the inside. Increased vehicle weights, wider tyres, chavvy pop fart exhaust fashions (guilty BTW) all actually make the cars noisier for those outside. Road roar - as in wind and tyre noise is the predominant sound of modern cars. Much better at 20mph.

It's a social, a legal and a safety thing. Not Mad Max where anything goes after dark.

Away from residential areas is a different matter.


----------



## alan hanson (May 21, 2008)

garycha said:


> plus at 20mph cars do make less tyre and engine noise, so the rest can get better sleep.


are you being genuinely serious?


----------



## bigfatsi (Apr 15, 2015)

Slow kills too. Especially when another bloody Honda Jazz joins the motorway at 30mph.


----------



## kingswood (Jun 23, 2016)

andy665 said:


> The technology exists to have variable speed limits - are you prepared to pay for it?
> 
> I'd rather see my money spent on education, the NHS than to save 10-15 seconds by being to pass a school at a higher speed at 2am in the morning.


we dont need more nanny state intervention, we need people who are capable of making commen sense, dynamic risk assesments and drive to the road conditions.

not been to worried looking at their speedo and wondering if a camera is hiding in the next bush


----------



## wish wash (Aug 25, 2011)

According to statistics the 20mph zones are causing more accidents.


----------



## Caledoniandream (Oct 9, 2009)

wish wash said:


> According to statistics the 20mph zones are causing more accidents.


According to statistics, 1 in 7 dwarfs is Happy. 
Statistics don't mean anything without the context, Supermarket car parks have the highest accident rate, but very rare people get injured. 
Motorway's have the lowest accident rate but have the most fatalities.

If people kept their selves to the speed limits, camera vans would be a thing of the past, every time they caught a speeder, shows that people cannot self-regulate.
It's a vicious circle, you speed more, they put more camera's down and on and on.


----------



## wish wash (Aug 25, 2011)

Caledoniandream said:


> According to statistics, 1 in 7 dwarfs is Happy.
> 
> Snow White can't be doing a very good job if only 1 dwarf is happy out of 7


----------



## andy665 (Nov 1, 2005)

kingswood said:


> we dont need more nanny state intervention, we need people who are capable of making commen sense, dynamic risk assesments and drive to the road conditions.
> 
> not been to worried looking at their speedo and wondering if a camera is hiding in the next bush


What we need is fewer people who derive fun out of breaking speed limits in residential / urban areas

I live in a 20mph zone and sick and tired of people "who know better" and are obviously paying far more attention to their driving than their speed as they drive way in excess of the limit. Perhaps the parents of the little boy killed by such a driver last year should take comfort from the fact that the driver was applying common sense when deciding what speed was safe to drive at

Accepted is the fact that said child ran out - children are children and cannot be relied upon to always pay attention- the onus of responsibility lies with adults and quite rightly so


----------



## kingswood (Jun 23, 2016)

andy665 said:


> What we need is fewer people who derive fun out of breaking speed limits in residential / urban areas
> 
> I live in a 20mph zone and sick and tired of people "who know better" and are obviously _*paying far more attention to their driving than their speed*_ as they drive way in excess of the limit. Perhaps the parents of the little boy killed by such a driver last year should take comfort from the fact that the driver was applying common sense when deciding what speed was safe to drive at
> 
> Accepted is the fact that said child ran out - children are children and cannot be relied upon to always pay attention- the onus of responsibility lies with adults and quite rightly so


im sorry for their loss.

But youve hit the nail on the head - people should be concentrating on their driving and not the speedo, looking ahead for hazards, parked cars, children playing etc.


----------



## Kerr (Mar 27, 2012)

kingswood said:


> im sorry for their loss.
> 
> But youve hit the nail on the head - people should be concentrating on their driving and not the speedo, looking ahead for hazards, parked cars, children playing etc.


I don't understand why people find it so hard to maintain a speed and occasionally glance at the speedometer.

If that simple task causes them any kind of difficulty at all they simply shouldn't have a driving licence.


----------



## kingswood (Jun 23, 2016)

Kerr said:


> I don't understand why people find it so hard to maintain a speed and occasionally glance at the speedometer.
> 
> If that simple task causes them any kind of difficulty at all they simply shouldn't have a driving licence.


personally i dont, but this forum has had many posts of people becoming obsessed with the speed limit instead of the quality of driving (50mph on motorways been common)

the increase of indiscrimate cameras when the only purpose seems to be revenue has impacted on peoples ability to drive - as ive said before speed isnt a killer but its easy to spot via cameras and raise money

what we need is more traffic police, using discretion - which is how they were trained - catching dangerous driving, something cameras cant do.


----------



## Kerr (Mar 27, 2012)

kingswood said:


> personally i dont, but this forum has had many posts of people becoming obsessed with the speed limit instead of the quality of driving (50mph on motorways been common)
> 
> the increase of indiscrimate cameras when the only purpose seems to be revenue has impacted on peoples ability to drive - as ive said before speed isnt a killer but its easy to spot via cameras and raise money
> 
> what we need is more traffic police, using discretion - which is how they were trained - catching dangerous driving, something cameras cant do.


How many times have you been caught speeding by a camera? If cameras are strategically positioned to catch drivers unaware surely half the population would lose their licence easily? I've been caught once in around 500,000 miles.

I genuinely don't see many people at all doing 50mph on a motorway. Driving up large sections of the M74/M6 you're lucky to find people travelling under 80mph for large sections. I don't believe there's a single camera on the entire length of the motorway.

The proven fact is on roads where average speed cameras are installed serious accidents and fatalities drop dramatically. What changes then? Are they forced to pay some attention and not just click on cruise control, or is the drop in serious accident directly linked to the drop in average speeds?

As soon as the police start putting more police on traffic duties the instant cry is always for them to "go catch real criminals".

It just amazes me how many drivers accept zero responsibility for their driving and have an excuse for everything.


----------



## andy665 (Nov 1, 2005)

kingswood said:


> im sorry for their loss.
> 
> But youve hit the nail on the head - people should be concentrating on their driving and not the speedo, looking ahead for hazards, parked cars, children playing etc.


Could not be more wrong - he was doing approx 35mph and when asked why it was because he felt that 20mph was too slow.

You stated that speed does not kill - try telling that to my son's DEAD friends parents.

Do I break the limit - yes - not by much nowadays and NEVER in 20, 30 or 40 mph zones - might make me boring but I'd rather be boring than feel that breaking urban speed limits is fun - I call it arrogant, stupid and bloody selfish


----------



## kingswood (Jun 23, 2016)

Kerr said:


> How many times have you been caught speeding by a camera? If cameras are strategically positioned to catch drivers unaware surely half the population would lose their licence easily? I've been caught once in around 500,000 miles.
> 
> I genuinely don't see many people at all doing 50mph on a motorway. Driving up large sections of the M74/M6 you're lucky to find people travelling under 80mph for large sections. I don't believe there's a single camera on the entire length of the motorway.
> 
> ...


ive been caught once in 20yrs, on a temp 30mph in a 60mph, altho the other side of the road was still a 60mph. thats the type of stupid rules set by departments that gives you little faith.

average cameras are a fair point but has massive drawbacks. theres a 60 road near me that has 20 miles of them. was once a nice driving road, safe stretches to overtake lorries etc. now people are to scared they travel at 50mph causing massive tailbacks. people too scared to go over that thinking they mite get caught.

not to mention that 70/80mph would be perfectly safe overtaking etc on a dry bright sunny day but the cameras will have you. yet do 60mph on a wet foggy dull winter day and the cameras think your driving is ok.

more traffic police at appropriate times, not what i saw last week where a traffic car was sat on the motorway at 5am on a sunny morning nicking people doing 80mph. thats what annoys people. altho a traffic car pulling clowns hogging the middle lanes wont get any grief.

i take responsibility for my driving, the fact is if we want no fatalities on the road we need to get back on our push bikes. limits are set by massivily risk adverse public departements too keen to cover their 

shall we talk about all the traffic calming measures like speed humps and mini roundabouts that councils sprung up about 15 years ago?! they were to save lives etc. all it did was make people speed up in between. typical nanny state telling us how to drive when we all knew they were a pain and rubbish.

we all want safer roads and less lives lost, the unfortunate thing is that reducing speed alone wont solve anything


----------



## kingswood (Jun 23, 2016)

andy665 said:


> Could not be more wrong - he was doing approx 35mph and when asked why it was because he felt that 20mph was too slow.
> 
> You stated that speed does not kill - try telling that to my son's DEAD friends parents.
> 
> *Do I break the limit - yes -* not by much nowadays and NEVER in 20, 30 or 40 mph zones - might make me boring but I'd rather be boring than feel that breaking urban speed limits is fun - *I call it* arrogant, stupid and bloody selfish


i couldnt be more sorry for them but speed was a factor - not the cause.

and unfortunatley you stating that you break the limit, then mitigate it by saying not much - i call that hypicritical.

i never said i speed in urban areas for fun, i said explain why i need to do 20 past a school at 2am.

lets agree to disagree and both drive safely


----------



## Kerr (Mar 27, 2012)

kingswood said:


> ive been caught once in 20yrs, on a temp 30mph in a 60mph, altho the other side of the road was still a 60mph. thats the type of stupid rules set by departments that gives you little faith.
> 
> average cameras are a fair point but has massive drawbacks. theres a 60 road near me that has 20 miles of them. was once a nice driving road, safe stretches to overtake lorries etc. now people are to scared they travel at 50mph causing massive tailbacks. people too scared to go over that thinking they mite get caught.
> 
> ...


So basically speed cameras aren't that intrusive then? A bit of common sense means that you're highly unlikely to be targeted and caught. You admit you like to speed, but you've only been caught once by an oversight.

Again I don't see the issues you do with average speed cameras. Half the drivers on the roads I use are now confident enough to know how far they can push the limit of them. The driving standard on the A90 instantly increased on their installation. Most cars travelling at 70mph makes the road flow so much smoother than it did before when it was gatsos installed.

Bad driving is going to mean more average cameras installed as they work. I agree with them on some roads, but it will.be a sad day when they are everywhere.

I don't see an issue with the police being on the road at 5am. Look how many people get caught the morning after while still drunk and unable to drive. It seems an obvious time to target bad driving.

I think, like many other people, your fear is far greater than reality.

I used to keep a running blog on here for accidents in my local area trying to emphasise a point. I've now lost 3 friends to accidents on the road. Two were self driving incidents related to their speed and one was wiped off his bike. The guy somehow lost control of his car on a 40mph dual carriageway and ended up spinning and hit his bike at 90 degrees. He was let off by the court very very lightly.

Another was wiped off his bike by a speeding Subaru driver, who lost control and rolled, and was very lucky to survive. The Subaru driver hasn't been up for trial yet.


----------



## cheekymonkey (Mar 15, 2008)

Kerr said:


> I don't understand why people find it so hard to maintain a speed and occasionally glance at the speedometer.
> 
> If that simple task causes them any kind of difficulty at all they simply shouldn't have a driving licence.


is that part of the driving test?


----------



## cheekymonkey (Mar 15, 2008)

Kerr said:


> How many times have you been caught speeding by a camera? If cameras are strategically positioned to catch drivers unaware surely half the population would lose their licence easily? I've been caught once in around 500,000 miles.
> 
> I genuinely don't see many people at all doing 50mph on a motorway. Driving up large sections of the M74/M6 you're lucky to find people travelling under 80mph for large sections. I don't believe there's a single camera on the entire length of the motorway.
> 
> ...


how many of the police force have been caught ?
As for real criminals, a good friends sister was attacked and raped. my car was hit by a drink driver, the police wasn't interested. infact i found the car and the address of the guy who hit my car. police wasn't bothered. 
We ended sorting both out our selfs. we did it properly. police only intrested if they can make money, such as a speeding ticket. hope you never end up where you really need them. they will end up letting you down, they are more interested in the speeder.


----------



## cheekymonkey (Mar 15, 2008)

andy665 said:


> Could not be more wrong - he was doing approx 35mph and when asked why it was because he felt that 20mph was too slow.
> 
> You stated that speed does not kill - try telling that to my son's DEAD friends parents.
> 
> Do I break the limit - yes - not by much nowadays and NEVER in 20, 30 or 40 mph zones - might make me boring but I'd rather be boring than feel that breaking urban speed limits is fun - I call it arrogant, stupid and bloody selfish


how can you have a dig at any one, when you admit you break the speed limit yourself? Fact more people are killed at higher speed than lower speed


----------



## Caledoniandream (Oct 9, 2009)

cheekymonkey said:


> how many of the police force have been caught ?. police only intrested if they can make money, such as a speeding ticket. hope you never end up where you really need them. they will end up letting you down, they are more interested in the speeder.


I hear this nonsense everyday, always by people who got caught speeding.
The definition of a criminal is somebody who breaks the law, what makes one crime less important than another?

If this was a "money making scheme "as so many call it, why are the fines than not much higher? 
In the Netherlands going 30mph over the limit will make you loose your vehicle (regardless who owned it) 
Fines are substantial higher in most other countries than in the UK
Also there are plenty places where they could make a lot more money with camera's than on the places where they are now (M6 north of Blackpool / M74) average speed there is around 80/85 mph)

I have been caught speeding 36 in a 30, but there is no excuse, I accepted it, luckily was offered a course, paid the cost and learned a lesson.

We are in a democracy and we all voted for the lawmakers, start a party for total anarchy if you think that's the solution.
But I rather have a consistent law system where we know where we stand.

The police can't do right from wrong, when there where a lot, or even now when it's cut to the bare bones.

Don't say we live in a police state, we are millions away from that.


----------



## B8sy (Dec 6, 2014)

wish wash said:


> Caledoniandream said:
> 
> 
> > According to statistics, 1 in 7 dwarfs is Happy.
> ...


----------



## andy665 (Nov 1, 2005)

cheekymonkey said:


> how can you have a dig at any one, when you admit you break the speed limit yourself? Fact more people are killed at higher speed than lower speed


Doing 75 in a 70 cannot be equated to 35 in a 20.

75 in a 70 equates to 7 % over the limit, 35 in a 30 is 75% over the limit - ridiculous to think that it's any way comparable

Traffic is so bad in so many areas that the time saving over a journey by knowingly breaking the speed limit is simply not worth it. I regularly do a 100 mile journey to Milton Keynes. Sticking to all speed limits probably adds 5 mins to a 2hr 15min journey.

Do I think all speed limits are approriate - absolutely not but to those who think it's ok to break speed limits regularly I suppose the question should be - what's the benefit?

Not justifying my 75 in a 70 (and by no means all the time - anyone who regularly travels at bottom of M6 and any section of the M1 knows 70 is often a dream) - it offers no tangible benefit.

30 in a 20, 40 in a 30, 50 in a 40 etc - never do it and never would


----------



## kingswood (Jun 23, 2016)

Caledoniandream said:


> I hear this nonsense everyday, always by people who got caught speeding.
> *The definition of a criminal is somebody who breaks the law, what makes one crime less important than another?*
> 
> If this was a "money making scheme "as so many call it, why are the fines than not much higher?
> ...


been plenty of valid points made on both sides of the discussion but that is a terrible statement? many crimes are more 'important' than others.

speeding on the sentancing guidelines is low - as you stated - but the effort for a conviction is also low as most is done for the police via tech. its an easy, and profitable win for them. seen as its mainly law abiding people with tax, insurnace, mot and a registered place to live that get rinsed.

apart from that you make valid points. would hate to live in the neverlands!


----------



## macca666 (Mar 30, 2010)

cheekymonkey said:


> police only intrested if they can make money, such as a speeding ticket. hope you never end up where you really need them. they will end up letting you down, they are more interested in the speeder.


Understand your frustration about the way you feel you've been treated and only quoted part of your post as thats what my response is about.

I could be wrong but the money doesn't go directly to Police so why are they only interested in making money?. Here is a direct lift from a Freedom of Information response in September 2017

"speeding fines and penalty receipts are paid into the Consolidated Fund which is regarded as central Government's current account and used towards general 
Government expenditure, rather than ring-fenced for specific spending."


----------



## Kerr (Mar 27, 2012)

cheekymonkey said:


> how many of the police force have been caught ?
> As for real criminals, a good friends sister was attacked and raped. my car was hit by a drink driver, the police wasn't interested. infact i found the car and the address of the guy who hit my car. police wasn't bothered.
> We ended sorting both out our selfs. we did it properly. police only intrested if they can make money, such as a speeding ticket. hope you never end up where you really need them. they will end up letting you down, they are more interested in the speeder.


How many times have the police been caught?

The police don't make money catching speeders. The money doesn't go to the police. Catching a few drivers a day and handing out £100 fixed penalties wouldn't even pay the cost of the work.

I know quite a few police officers including people very senior. I can assure you they are as frustrated as everyone else. Continuous budget cuts, drops in staff and additional duties has hit the police hard. Sadly people would not be willing to pay extra tax to help improve the police and NHS.

The amount of police dedicated to traffic is tiny in relation to ordinary police officers. Again your fear and theory is totally different than reality.

You sorted it out with the guy who hit your car. You didn't really need the police. I know we all feel strongly about our cars on here, but the police probably don't have resources to investigate so many fender benders which happen frighteningly regularly. It's hugely frustrating, but it's not a crime of malicious intent and nobody was harmed.

I know when reporting a drink driver the police are very fast to respond to that. That's a safety issue they do take seriously and rightly so.

As for the rape case the police throw massive resources towards rape accusations. Personally I think the effort to seek rape convictions has actually gone too far. There has been a few very high profile failures recently. I also think that a large proportion of rape accusations simply aren't true.


----------



## Darlofan (Nov 24, 2010)

andy665 said:


> Doing 75 in a 70 cannot be equated to 35 in a 20.
> 
> 75 in a 70 equates to 7 % over the limit, 35 in a 30 is 75%


16.6666% not 75


----------



## cheekymonkey (Mar 15, 2008)

andy665 said:


> *Doing 75 in a 70 cannot be equated to 35 in a 20.*
> 
> 75 in a 70 equates to 7 % over the limit, 35 in a 30 is 75% over the limit - ridiculous to think that it's any way comparable
> 
> ...


of cause they are equal, they are both over the speed limit. do you know how much further it takes you to stop, doing 75 instead of 70?. its a lot more than you think.


----------



## macca666 (Mar 30, 2010)

Darlofan said:


> 16.6666% not 75


Reading the initial post he makes reference to doing 35 in a 20 which is where he is talking about the 75%. The second paragraph is obviously just a typo when he mentions 35 in a 30.



cheekymonkey said:


> of cause they are equal, they are both over the speed limit. do you know how much further it takes you to stop, doing 75 instead of 70?. its a lot more than you think.


I agree they are both over the speed limit however given that 70 will be on the motorway and 20 (or even 30 taking into account the typo) will be in a built up area i'd have to agree that there is an increased risk so they are not equal.

Not sure how anyone can say doing 5 mile over the speed limit on a motorway is just as dangerous as doing 15 over the limit in a built up area


----------



## cheekymonkey (Mar 15, 2008)

Kerr said:


> How many times have the police been caught?
> 
> The police don't make money catching speeders. The money doesn't go to the police. Catching a few drivers a day and handing out £100 fixed penalties wouldn't even pay the cost of the work.
> 
> ...


with you know some police you will also know that every traffic officer has to give out at least 1 traffic offence ticket every shift, thats money makeing. I never said that the money goes to the police.

mine wasnt a fender bender as you called it, the drunk hit my car on the front left. that is not a fender bender. the car needed new wing, bumper, bonnet, total new n/s/f suspension.new intercooler and new wheel and tyre. he hit the car so hard that the front ally was broke into 4 parts. I had just got out the car 2 minutes before. he also just missed a couple of guys coming the other way.

If you as you state know the police respond very quickly to drunk drivers, you can explain why after reporting it, then with in a hour of the accident i found where the guy lived and that his car which was damaged was at his address and passed this info onto the police, they failed to attend his address. 
The police allowed a drunk driver to get away with an offence which imo is way worse than speeding.


----------



## cheekymonkey (Mar 15, 2008)

macca666 said:


> Reading the initial post he makes reference to doing 35 in a 20 which is where he is talking about the 75%. The second paragraph is obviously just a typo when he mentions 35 in a 30.
> 
> I agree they are both over the speed limit however given that 70 will be on the motorway and 20 (or even 30 taking into account the typo) will be in a built up area i'd have to agree that there is an increased risk so they are not equal.
> 
> Not sure how anyone can say doing 5 mile over the speed limit on a motorway is just as dangerous as doing 15 over the limit in a built up area


I never stated the 5mph on the motorway was as bad, just that they are both over the speed limit and if he knew how much further it takes to stop doing an extra 5mph


----------



## macca666 (Mar 30, 2010)

cheekymonkey said:


> I never stated the 5mph on the motorway was as bad, just that they are both over the speed limit and if he knew how much further it takes to stop doing an extra 5mph


Ok I took it differently then as you said both were equal which I've read to be both the same and one is as bad as the other :thumb:


----------



## FJ1000 (Jun 20, 2015)

In my opinion, it's not as black and white as speed cameras are for safety or for money making. It's a bit of both.

A colleague at work was caught by a camera van, as he was speeding up coming out of a village in Kent into the NSL zone. He'd accelerated up above 30 before the 60 zone started...and I think I'd probably have done the same and got caught! That seems money making to me.

Perhaps it was an accident blackspot though - can't be sure.

I'm guilty of liking a bit of speed, but I'll only do it outside of built up areas, when visibility is good (want to be able to stop by the point on the road that your visibility ends) and there are no hazards.

I get the majority of my driving kicks out on the track though! Once you start doing trackdays, you're far less tempted to speed on the road.









Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Kerr (Mar 27, 2012)

cheekymonkey said:


> with you know some police you will also know that every traffic officer has to give out at least 1 traffic offence ticket every shift, thats money makeing. I never said that the money goes to the police.
> 
> mine wasnt a fender bender as you called it, the drunk hit my car on the front left. that is not a fender bender. the car needed new wing, bumper, bonnet, total new n/s/f suspension.new intercooler and new wheel and tyre. he hit the car so hard that the front ally was broke into 4 parts. I had just got out the car 2 minutes before. he also just missed a couple of guys coming the other way.
> 
> ...


What a twist of words. You specifically said if "they can make money" now on realising you're wrong you make a daft excuse.



cheekymonkey said:


> police only intrested if they can make money, such as a speeding ticket.


Taking £100 per day isn't money making. That wouldn't even cover one officer's salary for a shift let alone all the additional costs and expenses.

I wasn't aware every traffic police officer had to give out one ticket per shift. If a traffic officer is only giving out one ticket per shift clearly aren't doing their job very well. I don't think I've ever done a day's driving where I haven't seen countless offences that should be punished. I would have a field day as a traffic cop.

Reading your posts so far it comes across as if you have a strong dislike for the police. A bit like the dog threads where you become aggressive and overpower people in a way that gets people's backs up.

Do you have a criminal record?

Are you aggressive and ramble a lot at the police when you have to deal with them?

Is it maybe the case they don't want to deal with you for a certain reason i.e failing the attitude test and difficult to deal with?

I'm still surprised they never responded to a drink driver. I can't explain why they haven't as I wasn't there. If that drunk driver did something bad the police would be ripped to bits for not responding.


----------



## muzzer (Feb 13, 2011)

Keep on topic please


----------



## cheekymonkey (Mar 15, 2008)

Kerr said:


> What a twist of words. You specifically said if "they can make money" now on realising you're wrong you make a daft excuse.
> 
> Taking £100 per day isn't money making. That wouldn't even cover one officer's salary for a shift let alone all the additional costs and expenses.
> 
> ...


*
*

you know what you have a dig at me and my attitude, yet your just as bad mate, you twisting what i have said to suit yourself. you go on about me being aggressive and hard to deal with and how i may of failed the attitude test, really you telling me if your a victim of a crime, you have to pass an attitude test before the police will visit. total rubbish just like your view on rape. then you state about the police should be ripped to bits for not responding, make up your mind:wall:
As for my criminal record, although its none of your business, i dont have a criminal record. 
this is my last reply to you on this subject.


----------



## kingswood (Jun 23, 2016)

muzzer said:


> Keep on topic please


What was the question again?! :lol:


----------



## Mikesphotaes (Jul 24, 2016)

kingswood said:


> What was the question again?! :lol:


Just a mere three pages on how to lift your right foot!


----------

