Points on the licence...

[beancounter]

Your post appears a rambling.

Sincere apolgies. I will try to do better next time.

bc

p.s. since when was "rambling" a noun?

 

[hackbike 6]

Why dont they put the speed up to 150mph on motorways?

Of course I will never go on one.

BTW I avoid motorways like the plague.

 

[Sh4rkyBloke]

I mean wtf, wasnt there an ad about the chances of killing a child are halved when hit at 35 (maybe it was 40) compared to 30.

I'm assuming you meant that the chances doubled, rather than halved, but yes there was such a campaign and very hard hitting (excuse the pun) it was... probably didn't do anything to curtail those who persistently speed though, sadly.

 

[Eat MY Dust]

Anyway, I suppose what I'm getting at is that potentially losing your licence for two episodes of 90 mph on a motorway seems absurd, to me at least.

bc

What's absurd about it. The limit is 70 mph. Thus you're breaking the law and should be punished.

 

[jezhiggins]

[quote name='swee'pea99']90 on a clear motorway in the middle of nowhere at 3 in the morning can be no danger of even inconvenience to anyone else[/quote]

Can somebody tell me where this empty motorway is?

Even the M45 (a motorway so pointless they gave up building it half way through) has traffic on it in the middle of the night. Indeed, I was involved in a near collision on that very motorway at about 3 in the morning because another driver doing around 90mph wasn't paying attention.

 

[Eat MY Dust]

Can somebody tell me where this empty motorway is?

Even the M45 (a motorway so pointless they gave up building it half way through) has traffic on it in the middle of the night. Indeed, I was involved in a near collision on that very motorway at about 3 in the morning because another driver doing around 90mph wasn't paying attention.

What a very valid point!

 

[hackbike 6]

wasn't paying attention.

Common here,too much inexperience as well.Possibly the heat doesn't help???

 

[ferret fur]

Well, with my cycling hat on, I'd far rather they targeted crap drivers rather than just picked on one aspect of law breaking which technology happens to make easy to prove. Let's face it: This forum & others is full of helmet cam vids of drivers doing demonstrably dangerous, selfish & reckless things yet by & large the police do nothing about it, even when presented with the evidence. When faced with the choice of getting these numptys prosecuted or an otherwise safe, speeding driver I know which one I'd choose.

 

[louise]

I am in agreement with this, as a new driver you can have upto six points on your license and then you have to retake your test so therefore if for two years after you take your test you get done speeding and you get 6 points then its back to the driving school, might put a lot of boy racers showing off to their mates off whizzing round the streets at 60mph

 

[gavintc]

I am in agreement with this, as a new driver you can have upto six points on your license and then you have to retake your test so therefore if for two years after you take your test you get done speeding and you get 6 points then its back to the driving school, might put a lot of boy racers showing off to their mates off whizzing round the streets at 60mph

This is the current policy - 6 pts in 2 yrs and you lose your licence. Sadly, we do not have enough speed cameras for this to be completely effective.

 

[PBancroft]

Well, with my cycling hat on, I'd far rather they targeted crap drivers rather than just picked on one aspect of law breaking which technology happens to make easy to prove. Let's face it: This forum & others is full of helmet cam vids of drivers doing demonstrably dangerous, selfish & reckless things yet by & large the police do nothing about it, even when presented with the evidence. When faced with the choice of getting these numptys prosecuted or an otherwise safe, speeding driver I know which one I'd choose.

I seem to recall someone on this board proposing the idea of cars having optional "black boxes" or cameras which record the last 30 mins or so of journey time. In return, the driver would get a lower insurance premium.

I kinda like this idea, because it would work the same way as Mags' helmet camera - its a non-interested third party which would report on the behaviour of all involved. Sure, BOBs like Mags get to post the dodgy antics of other road users, but I have a hunch it has an impact on his cycling too. I'm not saying he is a bad cyclist, far from it - but its kinda embarrassing to post a video lambasting someone elses approach when it is evident you are the one at fault.

This has been evident when there has been any sort of controversy about any video posted here.

The same would be true of cars. The black box would record aggressive driving styles, speed. A camera would record what trajectory the driver was taking, whether the road ahead was plainly clear or obstructed when overtaking, for example.

If at fault, the driver would have this black box against him. If not, it would work in his favour. The same is true of cyclists, and its the one reason I am tempted to get one. Rewatching videos of close encounters (of which I have thankfully very few) I would be able to get another chance to review if I was to blame in anyway, and improve my riding style if necessary.

 

[jmaccyd]

There is an inconvenient truth that most motorists really try to avoid facing up to and that is fairly simple really, the faster you drive the more likely you are to have a collision, and the more serious this collision is likely to be. People who regularly speed have more collisions and they are more serious events than non-speeders.

 

[Rhythm Thief]

Your post appears a rambling. You accept the traffic levels have increased and that this is the factor that the speed limits on motorways are a major safety feature but you seem unable to make the logic jump to why we need to impose this major safety feature with speed limits.

Incidentally, one can still drive at 90 on a crowded motorway without touching the brakes, if one isd a good enough driver to think well ahead of oneself. Not that I would do that now, my van struggles to get past 65 and uses too much fuel when it gets there, but a few years ago I came all the way up from London to Wolverhampton on a busy Saturday afternoon at 90 odd, without once touching the brakes or performing a panicky lane change.
But, had I been nabbed for doing 90 in a 70 limit, you wouldn't have found me whining about it on here. I know what the law is and I know I was breaking it.

 

[Rhythm Thief]

the faster you drive the more likely you are to have a collision

That's not necessarily true ...

and the more serious this collision is likely to be.

... but that is.

 

[ufkacbln]

There has been alot of work published on "Risk Taking Behaviour " in drivers and this suggests that in some cases the need to take risks manifests itself in speeding, especially when this is excessive or recidivist.

The points are to be welcomed, but we also need to see this behaviour as the threat to safety that it really is and at the ban stage start assessing the drivers psychometrically to see whether their pyschological profile in fact makes them unfit to drive!