corradoboy

Do you think the current policy of penalising primarily speeding drivers works, and are the penalties really a detterent ? Which option do you think would give better results ?

josie

No.

Mandatory driver skills / training assessment with an advanced driving instructor after a period of time from passing test. Points for speeding reduced from 3 to 2. 4 points for mobile phone using losers.

corradoboy

My own take on it is that speed does not cause accidents (generally). I am a qualified driving instructor, spending up to 12 hours a day, 4-5 days a week observing this countries driving skills and know full well that most accidents are caused by bad driving.
I also firmly believe that the penalty system for punishing driving offences is woefully in need of revision. Most decent working people can stand a fine of 35-65 quid, and the points are just a minor irritation until you have 9+.
This has led to a culture of such total disregard for some laws and often safety in general. Imagine if all those under-takers, lane-hoggers, mobile phone users and fog-light pillocks were fined 1k+ each time they offended !
I would personally like to see more traffic officers on the road, observing drivers and with discretion either advising of peoples minor flaws or enforcing compulsory qualified training to the worst offenders. At least those whom are most liable to cause the chaos and carnage on the roads would actually get some benefit from their enforced expenditure. 6 hours with an ADI may set them back 120 quid or so, but they would come away with knowledge and experience to make them a better driver, instead of the current system which sees them come away with a bill and a frown.

richs2891

Have to agree with corradoboy here, would love to see jonny idiot fined 1K for fog lights etc but chances are he could not afford to pay it.
Would like to see them fined and educated by proper police on the roads (none of these silly safety cameras) first time and if caught a second time it back to driving school for you !
Still believe that should have to re take driving test / driving reassesment test (that CAN fail) every five years or so - combined with compulsary sight test every year.

Richard

josie

There is no point in re-taking a test. You know as well as I do that it is one thing passing your test and quite another driving on a day to day basis.

The assessment and education would be enough for people to choose to drive within the prescribed limit / prevailing conditions rather than the simplistic dragging in front of the courts with books down their pants for being a naughty boy / girl.

Points are not insignificant. You can, in theory, be caught a minuscule amount over the limit 4 times and you are banned.

corradoboy

A great idea in theory, but when you consider that there are 30 million drivers on the roads, if they were to be retested every 10 years that would be 3 million tests per year, on top of the 2.1m they already carry out through the 1889 examiners. That would require a significant increase in personnel and resources.

Gear Head

iTrader: (2)

You passed then m8?

corradoboy

Not fully. Hopefully in 6-8 weeks.

falkster

I couldnt have put it better myself which makes me wonder a little why you had a minor pop in the other thread!! As you said its not the speed that causes accidents

pslewis

You know what?

The Governments aim on speeding was to make it as unacceptable as drink/driving ..... the fact that these Forums are FULL of speeding related stuff always means that it is working

I say its now just the hardened speeders left - nail them to the wall ..... £5000 fine, take their car away, ban them for 5 years and put a BHP limit on them of 85BHP when they get back on the roads for 2 years - then, we may finally get speeding idiots OFF the roads!

Abdabz

Driving courses are a decent idea if they are coupled with the heavy fines and points and are paid for by the criminal driver...
Drivers need to be punished for speeding, not given special training and a certificate, but once penalised, a compulsory refresher in what those oh so confusing signs with the numbers in the middle mean, (at their expense) could be worthwhile...

jasey

Scale of fines for % over limit.

10-15% - £30.
15-30% - £300
30-50% - £3,000
50%+ - £30,000 (Or 1 month jail for each 1,000 you cant pay).

All money raised to be put into educating young drivers.

Gear Head

iTrader: (2)

Tut tut! You're not a FULLY QUALIFIED driving instructor then!
Got my stage 3 in 4 weeks.

swaussie

The Swiss have a sliding scale but above a certain speed it becomes income based or a minimum amount. We have no points system but if you are a habitual speeder the fines get more expensive every time.

This seems to work for most people because hitting you in the back pocket is what makes most people think twice and it doesnt matter if you are rich or poor the percentage of your income as a fine hurts just as much for both parties.

PeteBrant

What you absolutely must not do is make any system based on financial pentalty.

What it does, in essence, is allow the better off to drive exactly as they please.

The point ssystem works well, although perhaps an SP30 should be reduced to 2 points (as has been mooted) due to the massive increae in offences being caught.

However, any system that allows you to speed based on the amount you earn should not even be considered IMO.

jasey

Well the current "System" is slowly wiping out young drivers while everybody else just "Pays the tax".

If you were facing £30k for driving at 45mph through a 30mph and carried on you'd need your head examining.

PeteBrant

All depends on the value of £30K to you personally. To you and me it's a lot. To someone earning £3 million a year - it's the same as a £300 fine to us.

swaussies idea of a percentage of your income fine may be workable. - But certainly not a fixed sum.

T4molie

I find it amazing that these days I can drive approx 320 mile round trip from Bedford to Sale and back and sometimes see no Traffic Officers at all

jasey

10-15% - £30.
15-30% - £300
30-50% - £3,000
50%+ 50% of your annual salary or £30,000 - highest applies (Or 1 month jail for each 1,000 you cant pay).

swaussie

no money limit here I am afraid. A few years back a youngish bloke with a new porsche turbo got caught going 110kmh too fast on the autobahn. He had to sell the car to pay the fines (but was rumoured to have been caught only a few days before).

The theory here is a percentage of your income no matter what you earn (but extreme speeding fines are at the discretion of the judge)

Curse of the Rushing Gimp

What a stupid poll. All the options are cr*p.

PeteBrant

THat still doesn't work. That is basically saying that someone on a high income can drive 30% over the speed limit.

Leslie

I think it is a gross generalisation to say that excessive speed does not cause accidents. It may not necessarily be the starting cause of a problem, although it could be of course if someone was speeding in a silly place or lost control of his car.

If it is not the primay cause then when a situation arises, the excess speed means that one's safety margins are cut down thus making it more difficult to avoid an accident and also of course, the results of the accident will almost certainly be worse than if the speeds involved were lower.

With the extreme overcrowding and frequency of vehicles appearing on the road at most times of the day, there can be no excuse for excessive speed in modern times. I do remember very well when roads were not in the least bit crowded. Those were also the days when there was no upper limit outside built up areas. Cars were generally not that fast then but driving was a sheer pleasure then and there were plenty of speedcops to keep things under control and also to catch the drunks, and uninsured and dangerous drivers. Something that we need more than anything these days.

I am not railing about the minor speed infringements that we all make but of extreme speeding on public roads in excess of three figures. That is a very selfish way to behave and it is done just for personal enjoyment at what could be someone else's expense, possible causing severe injury or even death. That kind of thing cannot be excused. We do not have a God given right to drive dangerously risking other people's lives etc. I would be amazed if anyone here can justify such behaviour!

"Speed does not kill" is an erroneous statement and I don't think in all honesty that anyone can prove otherwise!

If you want to swank about what an ace you are in a car-go and do a few track days. You might get a bit of a shock when you try it too!

Les

corradoboy

I also think that "Speed kills" is a gross generalisation.

Purely as an example, in two days during November last year I witnessed 4 traffic accidents. All of them took place at below 20mph, one of them resulting in serious injury to a cyclist, although I have never found out how serious. The cyclist was hurt because he was uneducated. Anyone whom knows the Highway Code and has done the Cycling Proficiency Test knows that on a major roundabout, cyclists and horses should keep to the very outside, signalling clearly and making necessary observation. This guy was knocked off in the very middle, amongst 4 lanes of traffic. The fact that his bike did not appear to have a bell making it illegal for road use compounded the lack of training required for cyclists to use the same public highway as qualified, taxed, insured drivers in their mechanically inspected vehicles. I can only assume he didn't have a helmet on, but I think that should be legal too, as should the compulsory fitment of lights at all times during public highway usage. The other 3 accidents were bumps caused by people not paying attention. Whether they were daydreaming, using their phones, or staring nervously at their speedo's I do not know, but all these accidents were caused by bad driving IMHO.

jasey

Every accidental death on the roads that I've read about locally has either involved a young **** driving too fast (or his/her passengers) or an old dick riding too fast on his motor bike.

I've had a few accidents in my time - all the ones involving speed were much more scary and life threatening than the one where I pulled out and hit a wifey that had stopped right in front of me.

As speed increases so do the dangers.