Hi Guys,

Just thought I would add my 2 pence worth!

Mainly on speeding actually! Recently I have been seeing alot on the news, both TV and new papers about accident and with the odd politician, Now what do they say is the cause of these accidents? SPEED!....... ABSOLUTE BOLLOCKS!!!! excessive speed is a contributing factor but it is not the cause of the accident! Why can't these people get that into their thick heads? (Seemingly it is just the perfect excuse to justify the huge increase in speed camera's, therefore that is why they make such a big deal about it)

When you look at the bigger picture it is not speed that kills! and in 98% of all accident excessive speed is not the cause of accidents!!!

The cause of accidents is poor driving skills, lack of concentration and most deffinitly the lack of observation and comprehension of the hazards around them!

Even if someone was doing 60mph in 30 zone, if they were driving for what they can see and actually observing and processing the information about hazards etc, they would easily be able to avoid an accident, even though they are driving at double the limit!

So to all those people who call for speed enforcement to be tightened and who blame speed purely as the cause of most accidents! Change the damn record and stop being so narrow minded!

If the money from speeding fines went into raising the driving standard of britains drivers instead of pumping it into more and more speed camera's, then there would be a big decrease in the amount of accident!

It's not speed that kills! It's the lack of driving experience/skill/level that Kills!

Also as a further point, Speed camera's themselves are adding to the car deaths/accidents statistics! The more speed camera's there are to more accidents there are going to be cause by them! Why?....

Joe Bloggs driving down a country road at 80MPH, gets half way round the bend, see's a speed camera (Lets say the limit is 40mph), He slams on his brakes in an effort to avoid a fine/points, now, Two things could easily happen here, both bad, 1) The car behind is no prepared for the guy in front to slam on his brakes and is gonna go smack into the back of him, or 2) The guy slamming on the brakes is gonna loose it and either go head on into another car, wrap his car around a tree, or end up in a ditch/wall/house/field! (And on a wet road the chances of this happening are going to be increased greatly and someone will probably end up dead!)

Now before anyone starts having a go at me, I am not condoning or saying that people should drive like a lunatic! This a a slightly extreme example but hopefully it gets my point accross!

Evil

 

the speed doesnt kill argument will never work, if everyone drove within the speed limits there would be less deaths, anyone who thinks otherwise is nuts.

now while it may be that driving properly would save even more deaths it is harder to enforce and from the politicians point of view how can they move on to bad driving when they still have 90% of ppl ignoring the speed issue.

T

ps- the "modern cars need a higher limit" stuff is never gonna happen either, our mototways are clogged up and always busy- you will NEVER have a raised limit because when a lump of metal goes out of control at 100mph it WILL do more damage than if it was doing 70, lumps of metal have always done this.....its physics which i belive has been around longer than ABS.

 

well in my opinion people should have to have their driving assessed a different ages for everybodys and their own safety.
i know people will argue that it only a small majority who have poor driving skills but it only takes one to cause an accident.


And i also think people of certain ages should be resricted to the size of car they can drive like motor bikes. this way u would not get rich kids driving about in 300bhp imprezas who can not drive them

anyone agree??

 

Tiggs- What a crass statement to make but as it's your opinion then you are entitled to it.

Speed doesn't kill, bad driving does.

I'm sure if everybody stuck to the speed limits then accidents may even increase, I for one would find myself wanting to swap seats during my journey just to spice it up, that's not to say I break the speed limits everywhere, on the contrary. If there was no variation in the speed people drove at, then it would probably take you 4 hours just to visit your nearest town centre.

There is no discretion in anything today, like there once was, as soon as the doo-gooders get hold of a little power, the law states this and that and everybody has to adhere to it regardless of experience, type of vehicle, conditions etc.

I'm convinced it's because these decision makers have a completely different outlook on life, the type that never played sport at school.

The Police need to spend more time pulling over the useless drivers and prosecuting them.

It should be an offence to drive whilst sitting in a hideous driving position,Most drivers would hardly stand a chance of correcting their steering in an emergency the way they position themselves in the seat. That alone would see 80% of drivers in trouble( including every doo-gooder no doubt).

Bring on that as a law!

 

That happens all the time - someone pulling out in front of you when there is nothing behind you & then not even having the decency to put their foot down. It drives me mad that they just can't bloody wait untill you pass.
Why don't they get done for dangerous driving & driving without due care and attention which is what this is??

 

Tiggs,

I wasn't arguing that speed limits should be increased, and by your comment, I could counter argue that a car will do alot less damage at 20mph than 70! so? Does that mean we should drive at 20mph and no faster?

As i said, yes, speed is a contributing factor, but it is not the main cause of these accidents like the news/police/politicians make out! It is the fact that people do not THINK! I have no sympathy for someone who goes and kills themselves or others throu deliberate reckless driving or not paying attention, if people drove to the conditions and for what they could see there would be far far less accidents as people should be able to anticipate what is/or could be around a bend, what another driver might do and drive to ensure you can stop safely regardless of what the other driver does!

It is a fact that if you have a problem, tackling it somewhere other than the main source is not going to solve the problem.

Rather than just putting up as many speed cameras as they can they could give police the power to make offenders undertake an advanced driving course or face a huge fine / points / ban! Faliure to do so could result in fine and or jail! Something like that! The politicians have the power to do this so it seems absurd that they don't, after all it would certainly increase the driving standards and attitudes of drivers!

Cairan & Ali-b:

Yep, agree there, One of the most blatent examples of what I am trying to get across is OLD PEOPLE!!!! now before the older generation start accusing me of singling them out, I mainly refer to the elderly, not because they are old, but because it is a known fact that the older you get, the slower your reaction times get! Therefore there should certainly be something enforced so that at a certain age your driving should be checked to makesure that their driving is up to standard!

In the situation Ali mentioned! If your coming up on a bend that has a juntion on it 9 times out of 10 there is going to be a sign, if you see it you will know that there might be someone about to pull out who cannot see you, therefore you adjust your speed appropriatly, and if you drive so that you can stop safely within the distance you can see, then even if they do pull out, you'd be able to stop within the distance you can see right???!

Personally, I do not think the basic driving test is good enough! For a start it doesn't cover ANY motorway driving what so ever, How stupid is that?! No wonder most motorway drivers are terrible!

Some of you might have done the Advanced Driving with the IAM, I have, Passed it last month! I think the basic driving test should be at least half way between the current normal driving test and advanced driving test!

As for those driver who do 45 in a 60 zone and then 45 in a 30 zone! That also goes towards proving my point, those type of people are basically Zombies! (no sarcasm meant)! they literally drive on auto pilot! I bet if you stopped on of them and asked them a few easy questions like, Whats the speed limit here? what was the last road sign you past? what markings were on the last 100 yards of road? They would have absolutually no idea!

Finally, thanks to those to are broad minded enough to see my point!

[Edited by EvilKyote - 5/1/2003 1:20:36 PM]

[Edited by EvilKyote - 5/1/2003 1:22:17 PM]

 

Probably off topic and miles away from the original thing.

what seems to cause a huge amount of frustration, and often leads to accidents is the slow tractors / lorries / slow cars on country roads. It's when on a twisty road they are going slowly and no matter how many cars end up behind them they wont pull over. You always get some people who are unwilling to overtake an this is where you end up getting the lunatic from 4 cars back pulling out and going for it. Seen it happen so many times and i've some nasty accidents cause of it.

We should addopt the same sort of law they have in Norway. I think it's any more than 3 cars waiting behind you and by law you must pull over or get a fine / points. I think.

 

I was driving down the M1 the other week very early in the morning, I was in the left hand lane doing 70 when i closed up on a car that had been sitting in the middle lane for miles...there wernt any other cars around...nothing...he was just sitting there doing 60mph.
As I came up to him I pulled into the middle lane and flashed my lights at him, he pulled over into the left hand lane but gave me a right look as i passed, as soon as i passed I mooved back into the left lane and looked in my mirror...guess waht ///yup he mooved back into the middle lane ???????
I just dont understand the way some people drive these days.

Andy

 

Daz - to some extent I agree. As long as the driving school instructors are up to it!

 

"Speed doesn't kill, bad driving does."

yeah...guns dont kill...its bad aim that kills..lets all have guns!

you will never win the argument in the real world, if everyone drove at the speed limit there would be less deaths and its easy to enforce...hence it is.

T

 

Yes, I just remembered, heres a perfect example of inappropriate use of a speed camera!

In portsmouth there is one for traffing going onto the motorway! ON TO THE MOTORWAY! HELLO!?!?!

 

>>yeah...guns dont kill...its bad aim that kills

In a way your right! A gun by itself does not kill! it needs a person or being to pic up the gun, aim and someone and pull the trigger! Therefore it is a consious act by the person holding the gun in order to kill someone that does it! That is commonly why the user of the gun is sent to jail, not to gun itself!

Driving at the speed limit will reduce deathes! Bollocks! You could kill someone if you hit them at 20-30mph!!!

Extreme example time!

Joe bloggs is driving throu the town, he is half asleep, in a world of his own off thinking about what he is going to do next week, paying hardly any attention what so ever to his driving, But that doesn't matter does it!!!? of course not, he's driving at the speed limit so he not going to kill someone by not paying attention is he? of course not! he is totally safe, hey he might as well be asleep at the wheel, but as long as he stays within the speed limit everyone is safe!!!

WAKE UP TIGGS!!!! Thats the biggest load of bollocks I have ever heard (And I read through the muppet show forum everyday!!!)

 

"Extreme example time!

Joe bloggs is driving throu the town, he is half asleep, in a world of his own off thinking about what he is going to do next week, paying hardly any attention what so ever to his driving, But that doesn't matter does it!!!? of course not, he's driving at the speed limit so he not going to kill someone by not paying attention is he? of course not! he is totally safe, hey he might as well be asleep at the wheel, but as long as he stays within the speed limit everyone is safe!!!"


interesting that you resort to an extreem example to a make a point, i doubt legislation and the thinking behind it will be altered based on extreems?

anyway, heres a not extreem example.

my office looks out over a road where a 60mph limit becomes 30mph as it approaches town.

every day at rush hour the traffic builds up in the 30mph area, every day ppl who havent slowed to 30mph lock up and skid because they suddenly hit traffic ques. EVERY DAY, on occassion they crash.

EVERY DAY....now if they drove at 30mph that wouldnt happen.

im all for cameras....put them everywhere...and little boxes in the car to stop you going over the limit!! bring it all on!

T

 

I Judge by your scilence you have given up your argument then tigg?

 

Oh well, in for a penny etc. etc.

Improving driving standards is a worthy aim but how? Certainly, re-testing every few years would ensure that people were physically able and knew something of the rules of the road. There will always be those who can pass the test and arrogantly do WTF they like once they've got the certificate or a new licence. Then there's the problem of people who never learn or never apply for a licence but drive anyway.

Politically, regular re-testing wouldn't endear any political party to today's ageing population and that's not going to get any better year by year.

A variable speed limit on motorways could be implemented, similar to the way that the French do it. i.e. faster in the dry, slower in the wet. I do NOT mean the way this is set-up on the M25 in case anyone's asking.

I can understand why some people don't like driving in the nearside lane of some motorways. On the M25 you invariably get siphoned off onto a junction and the surface has great grooves worn into it by processions of arctics - it's bl**dy dangerous in the wet. I hate/fear those who sit zombie like in whatever lane it happens to be

I have overtaken on the inside but not in earnest since I got the scooby. I don't want some d*ckhead taking the opportunity to drop his Volvo 360 into the side of it 'cos he feels slighted.

Cheers,

Vindaloo

 

I think for a start the test for getting the licence should be more harder, or at the least passing that puts them into like a 3 month probationary period where they have to improve their driving and go back for a more harder test to get thier full licence.

 

ohhh, im back!

they dont pay attention...so what?

you cant make them so who cares.

what you can make people do is drive slower, in fact its all you can do with the resources.

if they drive slower they can can still daydream yet crash less.

simple!

 

Tiggs- using that gun argument really does show you up as the type I referred to, as does your location

A good constructive discussion always seems to go the same way.

Ok, you disagree but please don't use pathetic comparisons, that just loses respect for your opinion from anybody who might agree.

I'm off to do a drive-by at speed to test your theory.

 

No, no, no, no, no!

The way to get people to drive better is to make the test much harder in the first place. It would also reduce the amount of traffic on the roads.
The test should be a good hour long, with driving on all sorts of roads - urban, single carriage A-roads, and motorways. There should be a daytime test and a night-time test. A driving licence is not a right - it should be earned. Maybe you could restrict driver to cars under insurance group 8 for their first year after passing the test, and then to group 12 for the next year, and only after three years could you drive a group 20? Maybe that's still to quick a progression? There could be an advanced test which would let you move up to highere category cars quicker.

The MOT should also be made far stricter - there are too many old bones on the road which are just death-traps - badly matched tyres, sh@gged shockers, etc. When you see things like "Police Action" or whatever they call those programmes, matey stands on teh brakes because he's not noticed a red light or whatever, and his car spins. Why? His car is a wreck and can't even take an emergency stop.

The police should rip down all the cameras and focus on stopping people driving badly rather than too fast. They should also concentrate on getting dangerous cars (i.e. badly maintained) off the streets.

 

"The police should rip down all the cameras and focus on stopping people driving badly rather than too fast."

WAKEEEEEE UPPPPP EVERYYYYONNNNNEEE!


the police have NNNNOOOO money to do this, the only thing that will happen, as time passes, is more and more cameras will pop up.

speed will ALWAYS be the easiest thing to tackle and as such will be the thing tackled most, you can moan and complain and say what you like......but the speed kills message is one that MOST people understand and MOST people in power wish to pursue....so tuff!

T

 

Oh dear,

I thought it was bad, but you have to be kidding right?!!!!

Tiggs:

Quote:
'they dont pay attention...so what?

you cant make them so who cares.

what you can make people do is drive slower, in fact its all you can do with the resources.

if they drive slower they can can still daydream yet crash less.'

I couldn't actually quite beleive what I was reading, it just adds to my side of the argument!!!

Specifically:

'they dont pay attention...so what? you cant make them so who cares.'

Riiiiiiiiiiiight! ooooookay! So if they don't pay attention, then sticking up 30mph signs isn't gonaing to help is it! cause they ain't gonna pay attention!

You just well and truelly proved my point!

Quote 'you cant make them so who cares'

Will you be saying this when your son or daughter is killed by one of these drivers who doesn't pay attention? Somehow I don't see you saying 'So what' and 'Who cares' anymore! Will you!!!

Personally if you take that attitude, if you become the victim yourself of one of these accident that could be have been easily avoided, Don't expect my sympathy!

Mind you it is quite ammusing seeing you trying to argue against me only to end up proving my point by your own attitude! I think you just managed to make an example of yourself on that one!!!

Where do you live? (So I can make sure i drive no where near you!!!)

 

Just want to add,

I am not all out against speed camera's! As long as they are used to *Try* and slow traffic near schools, accident black spots!

The thing is, the HUGE increase in speed cameras has mainly been in places where there are no school, there are rarely accidents, just *right* where people are most likely to break the spead limit!

What is so strategic about this placement plan? MAXIMUM MONEY!

Speed camera's are no longer really being used / placed in the area's they should be or to slow traffic, The have been placed where they are placed to generate maximum revenue for the police!

THATS WHAT I AM DEAD AGAINST!!!!!!!!!!!!!

But back to my point, If people aren't going to pay attention anyway, whats the point in restricting speed limits then?

I am not saying speed has nothing to do with accidents! what I am saying is that it is wrongly labeled as the cause of accidents!

 

in 10 yrs it wont matter about signs as they will have black boxes in the cars to stop them speeding anyway.

by the way i didnt say daydreaming and driving was good- i said it was unstoppable so live with it you moaner!

T

 

Evil, Tiggs point is that if you drive slowly, you're less likely to crash. He's ignoring "bad" driving.
If everyone was forced to drive at 20mph of course there would be less crashes and hardly any deaths, so what he is saying is true.

I agree with your point re making drivers drive "properly" but I would imagine everyone drives poorly at some point.

You are in fact both correct so stop bickering please

cheers

Paul

 

To back up EvilKyote's "Joe bloggs" example above, have a read of http://www.safespeed.org.uk/thatad.html!!!!

mb

p.s. Congratulations on EvilKyote passing the Advanced Driving Test - have you Tiggs???

 

Tiggs: I am not moaning about it, I am simply making a point which unfortunatly you just don't seem to be able to grasp so I had to explain it for you!

Medders: Bickering? moi? Surely not! heh, There is nothing wrong with a constructive argument! It's good for the mind!

Boomer: Thanks for backing me up! I think that site more or less hammers it home!

From my earlier post:
--------------------------
Quote 'you cant make them so who cares'

Will you be saying this when your son or daughter is killed by one of these drivers who doesn't pay attention? Somehow I don't see you saying 'So what' and 'Who cares' anymore! Will you!!!
--------------------------

I was expecting you (tiggs) to try and ague even this, heh, very glad you didn't!

I agree that if everyone drives about at 20mph it would reduce accidents, but it is hardly a realistic solution to the problem! And speed camera's have been around for years and years and years and guess what? More and more people are caught speeding! Something tells me the idea of using them to cut speeding/road death isn't quite working!

This was of interest from that site:

Quote:
'It's quite obvious that a distracted or slow reacting driver will have a much greater overall stopping distance than one who is simply travelling a few mph faster. You might think that no-one fails to pay attention to the road ahead for 2.5 seconds, but consider this research published by RoSPA (click here) which contains the following alarming statistic on page 5: '

Click here = http://www.rospa.org.uk/pdfs/road/mobiles/report.pdf

point proved and sustained!

Thankyou and goodnight



Just a final bit, this again taken from that site:

Quoted:

It does take dramatically further to stop from higher speeds, but to suggest that stopping distance changes with speed are a significant contributor to accidents or accident outcomes is just absurd. You only have to look at the figures for accident outcomes to know that it isn't speed that kills in practise; there are countless millions of cases of potential danger from speed every single day, yet in 2001 only 107 child pedestrians were killed. We would obviously like the figure to be reduced, but asking drivers to slow down by 5 mph is an almost complete irrelevance.

Sometimes drivers use speed unwisely and such cases are to be deplored and discouraged. But the wise use of speed does not depend on an arbitrary speed limit, it depends on all the immediate local circumstances. There's nothing magically safe about 30 mph. There is something magically safe about always being able to stop within the distance that you know to be clear. Emphasizing this vital and somewhat forgotten driver skill could make a real difference.

So we find the advertisement misleading for the following reasons:

Proper observation of the road ahead is a far more important factor than small variations in speed.
If panic braking is required then the safety systems on which we depend have already failed.
Driver distraction is also likely to be a far more important factor.
We should also consider how we might reduce the number of pedestrians who cross dangerously in front of cars.
30 mph is sometimes extremely unsafe. We would rather see an emphasis on safe speeds.
Let's have real road safety advertisements please.

Thanks boomer on the congrats!



[Edited by EvilKyote - 5/1/2003 9:14:23 PM]

[Edited by EvilKyote - 5/1/2003 9:32:39 PM]

 

I often drive in excess of 1000 miles in a week and I have noticed a severe decline in driving standards over the last year in particular. I started driving five years ago at the age of 17 and I have seen a monumental decline in road safety levels since then. I am seeing an ever increasing number of accident boards put at the side of the road where a fatal accident has occured without witnesses and bunches of flowers left by relatives. This is deeply upsetting and I feel that action has to be taken over road safety.

The problem is that there does not seem to be anybody in an important decision making situation within the government who really knows about road safety. The Association of British Drivers (ABD) seem to be the only people really campaigning for increased road safety. The anti-speed supporters have their hearts in the right place but it is obvious to anyone with advanced driving abilities that they are woefully wide of the mark. I know they can produce many many statistics to support the Speed Kills thing, but statistics can be manipulated to say anything you really want.

The difficult question is how to improve road safety and I wont pretend to hold the answers. I would support the introduction of a tiered licence system whereby upon passing your basic test you are entitled to, for examplem, a 60hp car and not allowed on motorways. Upon completion of further test(s) any car can be driven. There are many difficulties implementing this and the question would still remain of how to educate the current driving population.

Most people think they are above average drivers. While this belief exists the vast majority of people will not pursue further training because they honestly dont think they need it. I feel that the government needs to really address this and draw up a plan to educate the driving population. However, the right people would need to do this. I would certainly support the employment of the likes of Paul Ripley and other well known advanced drivers to advise the government on road sfety.

 

Note to Ali-B

I understand about blind spots - that was my point, he undertook no doubt knowing he would at some point be in that blind spot - making it an even more dangerous and IMO stupid thing to do. It wasn't the lorry's fault - the guy was probably behind him the last time he looked, he wasn't expecting him to be undertaking him! I too have driven vans on motorways and understand that it's bloody frustrating if someone is dawdling and causing queues in the outside lane, especially if it takes a while to get the speed back up ... however, it is STILL extremely dangerous to undertake WHATEVER the reason. And bear in mind that while you are undertaking you are preventing the person in the outside lane from pulling into the middle lane, and if all the ***** stopped undertaking the guy who is causing the hold up in at the front of the outside lane queue might just be able to pull back into the middle lane ... subsequently alleviating the problem all together! I'm sure half the time these guys sit in the outside lane because they are too bloody scared to pull into the middle lane in case they hit some twonk who is undertaking them at the time! I'm kidding, but if someone is driving badly, that's their problem; it shouldn't be a green light for everybody else on the motorway to drive badly too. I'll get off my soap box now - and sorry if I've offended anybody, but it really pisses me off when people needlessly put other people's lives at risk by driving stupidly to 'make the point' to the guy at the front of the queue - we all know he's a jerk!

 

One way to get lane hoggers to move over: Close the distance between you and the car in front a LITTLE and put your right indicator on - as if you were going to overtake.

This seems to be such a gentle, polite, "You aren't paying attention and I'd like to go faster," that they seem to fly into the middle lane. Its more like you are asking them to move over rather than telling them and it works much more effectively than flashing lights/ tailgating. I