Why are people against CCTV and speed cameras on the roads?

[benb]

A vehicle rarely impacts at the speed it travels at though - I knew that the brake pedal was a good invention

This is true, but doesn't change the fundamental principle that collisions at higher speeds are more serious than those at lower.

I'm slightly amazed that on a cycling forum of all places, some people are of the opinion that speed limits should be down to personal interpretation by the driver.

 

[benb]

If it's a head on crash at 30 and a side swipe at 40 then yes.

Oh come off it, it was obvious I meant an otherwise similar collision.

 

[Linford]

No, but we want to slow people down across the board. I acknowledge that not all speeding offences represent equally dangerous or antisocial behaviour, but (with a very few and specific exceptions) all driving becomes less dangerous and antisocial if slowed down. And the reason there are places where drivers who notionally agree that speeding is generally wrong still feel it is OK to speed, is that the normalisation of speeding in those places is what maintains the conditions that make it seem OK to speed. It's circular reasoning, in other words.

I would rather have a sober and focussed driver passing me at 70mph on a 60mph road, than a drunk or drugged driver following them at 50mph - wouldn't you TC ?

 

[green1]

Alright then what age are the vehicles involved? I'd rather be involved in a crash @ 40 in a 6 month old vehicle then a crash @ 30 mph in a 15~20 year old banger.

 

[benb]

I would rather have a sober and focussed driver passing me at 70mph on a 60mph road, than a drunk or drugged driver following them at 50mph - wouldn't you TC ?

False dichotomy alert.

 

[Linford]

This is true, but doesn't change the fundamental principle that collisions at higher speeds are more serious than those at lower.

I'm slightly amazed that on a cycling forum of all places, some people are of the opinion that speed limits should be down to personal interpretation by the driver.

A fair few of the people here have extensive experience and training of other types of vehicles on the roads. The maxim stated in the highway code 'Drive at a speed which you can stop within the distance to be safe' relies on that principle. Sometimes it will be much lower than the posted, sometimes higher. I tow a trailer with standing animals, and rarely do I reach the relevant speed limit for the vehicle unless on a long, straight, flat and uninterupted stretch as I like to have lots of space to slow down. Sure it pees other drivers off as that is lower than the posted limits, but my primary concern is getting from A to B in one piece with the animals intact.

 

[Inertia]

Traffic Cops are Police Officers with the normal power of arrest. Smeggers was talking about the Highway Agency Traffic Officers, using a phrase he has borrowed from his spiritual leader.

Yes I realized this afterwards, thanks for clarifying. I hadn't heard of the wombles tag though.

I did hear that regular police officers look down on the traffic cops though.

 

[theclaud]

I would rather have a sober and focussed driver passing me at 70mph on a 60mph road, than a drunk or drugged driver following them at 50mph - wouldn't you TC ?

Linfy - we've covered your logic problem before. In order of preference for drivers passing me, where the first option is the best, and all of the last four are unnacceptable.

• Not at all
• Sober at <50mph
• Sober at 50mph
• Sober at 70mph
• Drunk at <50mph
• Drunk at 50mph
• Drunk at 70mph

Which bit are you having difficulty with?

 

[Nigel-YZ1]

 

[Linford]

False dichotomy alert.

You don't think it is a fair question to put ?

 

[green1]

You don't think it is a fair question to put ?

The new generation of speed cameras has a built in breathaliser don't you know.

 

[benb]

A fair few of the people here have extensive experience and training of other types of vehicles on the roads. The maxim stated in the highway code 'Drive at a speed which you can stop within the distance to be safe' relies on that principle. Sometimes it will be much lower than the posted, sometimes higher. I tow a trailer with standing animals, and rarely do I reach the relevant speed limit for the vehicle unless on a long, straight, flat and uninterupted stretch as I like to have lots of space to slow down. Sure it pees other drivers off as that is lower than the posted limits, but my primary concern is getting from A to B in one piece with the animals intact.

That's excellent, and I commend you. However a large amount of drivers don't have this policy. In the absence of a system that can detect whether exceeding the posted limit is safe, I think it's best to just get everyone to drive within the speed limit.

You don't think it is a fair question to put ?

No, because it's not a result of insisting people stick within the limit.

 

[srw]

my primary concern is getting from A to B in one piece with the animals intact.

You know what - that's my concern whenever I'm out on the road too. But the animals in question are usually human. And may or may not be known to me.

 

[Linford]

Linfy - we've covered your logic problem before. In order of preference for drivers passing me, where the first option is the best, and all of the last four are unnacceptable.

• Not at all
• Sober at <50mph
• Sober at 50mph
• Sober at 70mph
• Drunk at <50mph
• Drunk at 50mph
• Drunk at 70mph

Which bit are you having difficulty with?

Living in the perfect world bit - I struggle with this as we don't Claudine, so I'd be happy to settle for sober and focussed road users who are 100% aware of what is going on around them and don't put others at risk by pulling out on them when they don't have right of way, and also drive at a speed which they can stop within the distance to be safe.

You might not like that, but it is IMO a good compromise in the real world. You can be put in mortal danger by having a driver observing the limits, but little else around them.

 

[srw]

So how do you propose that police identify drunk drivers?