Discussion in 'General' started by koola, 12 May 2006.
Bad luck mate. Have you already admitted guilt? If not have a look here: http://www.pepipoo.com/
I make a point of sticking to the limit in 30 zones. 48 in a 30 is a lot over the limit, regardless of where it is. sorry, not trying to sound condescending or holier than thou or anything like that.
I got spotted by 3 police standing on the side of a road with a gun. I was doing 55 in a 40 on my way home from work. Dual carriageway. One of the officers waved his arm at me to slow down. I did. The end.
That was my latest run-in. God knows how but I haven't been fined for speeding yet.
I got pulled over doing 70 in a 30 zone on a bike...the car had been following me for about a mile and had a pretty good video of me. I got a telling off, but nothing else (not even a provider). The officer said they were looking for drunk-drivers that night, and I wasn't riding dangerously, just too fast (it was midnight btw, on a ring road).
I was probably let off 'cos when they flashed me and pulled me over the first thing I said was "that was a bit too quick I guess" and never once denied what I was doing, but did say I was watching the road, not my speedo, so wasn't fully aware of my speed.
I've learnt my lesson...I always check behind me for police cars now before letting rip.
That pisses me off. Cops which hide, and especially back lanes. When it's DRY and CLEAR really, what the hell's wrong with going a little fast as long as it's not dangerous? If it is, then sure, they're in the wrong. I take back roads on the way to work and I reguarly do 40/50 in a 30 because a) everyone else is and I would hold up traffic and b) no kids are out, there are no schools near by, it's clear, bright, dry and there are gentle bends.
Most of the roads around where I live (out in the country) have had their limits lowered. It's really annoying, since I've been driving on them since I was 17 (I'm 26 now) and I know almost every bump like the back of my hand.
I know exactly how fast I can go on these stretches of road and feel safe about it, and now they've made the limits 40 or 30, when it was perfectly safe to do 50 or 40 on them.
After driving points free since I passed my test (15 years ago), I've been caught twice in the last 6 months, both times by a mobile unit, both times on a dual carriageway, and both times in the middle of a weekday when the traffic was quiet. The second time, the van was hidden behind some trees on a bridge over the road.
At least in Wales they don't try to sugar-coat the name - they're called speed cameras, none of this "safety camera" rubbish.
In my opinion, speed camera = revenue generation
67 in a 50 for me. got caught by a red van parked up at the side of the road, with a back window missing and the back doors **** - no markings on the van. :/
was on the A1(m), going through some stupid village.
Should be about preventing people from speeding in the first place, not catching people at it!
People are given the responsibility of legally being able to drive at 60mph on some very hazardous twisty B-roads in the pouring rain, yet we can't go over 70mph on wide, open, smooth 3 lane roads designed for high-speed travel. Surely if (the majority of) people are clever enough not to kill themselves all the time in the situation I mentioned first then they could manage to keep to safe speeds on a motorway.
Actually, I think that they should be looking for the people who drive dangerously rather than those who just drive fast. People who tailgate at 80+, people who keep shifting lanes and undertaking, people who can't drive in a straight line - they should be targetted, not people who are driving safely (but fast) on a relatively quiet motorway.
The 70mph speed limit is 30 years old, and in those days cars were a lot less safe, and people weren't used to driving at that speed - if their cars could even get that fast! They should either increase the speed limit for main non-urban roads, or have speed limits that vary depending on the time of day/weather conditions/traffic conditions. Motorways are the safest roads in the UK, even with most people driving above 70mph, so why not update the law to reflect that?
Absoultely. Considering the qty of cars on the road, more people need to get to more destinations so maintaining the flow of traffic should be just as important as stopping people from being stupid. Afterall, speed doesnt kill people, stupid people kill people: you dont go driving at 30 around a school area, you take it easy. If the road says 60 and it's wet and slippery you dont do 60 do you? Just like if it's free, open, noone around what's the point of religiously sticking to the limit as long as noone else is potentially at harm. Afterall anything >30mph and if you hit someone they're 99% likely to die anyway, so it's not about the safety of someone jumping in front of you.
The law is the law. The roads/traffic were acessed for maximum safe traveling speed. I don't know about you, but to me it seams rediculous, saying that certain people should be allowed to go faster.
Thats not really what I think they mean. Crazydeep.
I think they mean, with the current safety features of cars, and general better roadholding than those of many years away - Limits should be pushed further.
Not certain people, just the police to act in the best interest of the public and not be a cash cow.
"People speed along here, lets catch them and rake it in".
"Is it really that dangerous to speed down here? Should we go somewhere where we could be more effective, like outside a school or hospital, or on a blind bend?"
I dont think the limits should be pushed further, afterall there are a lot of crap cars on the road (like mine), but there should be a level of sensibility.
WHEN were they assessed? How good were cars breaking and general safety back then?
Not as good as now, I'll betcha.
Also, the lessons and tests and what-not you had to pass to get a licence weren't as good as they are now. Lots has changed. Let's re-assess and see how the speed limits look, eh?
I thought about different levels of cars, to be able to do different things.
But it gets too complex.
Who wants to buy a new car only to wonder how fast they can
I agree with most of the things said in this thread apart from:
Although, as these figures are from the Department of Transport the old "94% of statistics are made up" rule probably applies!
You also have to remember that if you are travelling at (for instance) 40mph and hit a pedestrian at 40mph then they must have literally jumped out in front of you or you were driving with your eyes closed or something. Most people slow down very significantly before hitting a pedestrian. Just try an emergency stop on an empty road at a certain point and see how quickly you actually come to a standstill. Even half a second with your foot planted on the brake pedal can make a massive difference.
117mph on a 55 zone and 94mph on a 25 zone thats all I have to say about that next time I get pull over going 100+ I go to jail.so I try to drive the limit now.
Fair enough. Ive been hit at 20.
94 in a 25 is idiotic tbh. Sorry, but there's a reason for it being 25 and mostly likely a school or residential or something. Good luck peeling child off your bonnet.
Separate names with a comma.