British-Cars.org

Welcome to the DMR Site for British Car Information.

Recommendations

Parts

MG parts spares and accessories are available for MG T Series (TA, MG TB, MG TC, MG TD, MG TF), Magnette, MGA, Twin cam, MGB, MGBGT, MGC, MGC GT, MG Midget, Sprite and other MG models from British car spares company LBCarCo.

MG Midget and Sprite General - Speeding ticket - NMC

After 26 years unblemished driving I got my first ticket last week - 45 in a 30.

Unblemished or not caught - whatever!!!!

Just to say - as you leave the M5 J25 and head towards Henlade you pass the new park and ride. Through the lights and a bit of 2 lane dual carriage way - ITS 30 mph. The chap from work was behind and got done - 42 mph - so he gets the driver speed awareness day out!!!

Hey ho - its only money

Dave - 60 quid less and no doubt insurance hike - Price
Dave Price

Don't you get the speed awareness day as well?

John 'I think I might have one on the way' Payne
John Payne

No - not on page four - it was for him - I assume 45 was mad but 42 OK !!!
Dave Price

Doesn't normally affect your insurance until you have more than two speeders.
Dave O'Neill2

Blo!dy hope not - It was a fair cop but 0830 on a sunday morning - dry and sunny - a real risk - I think not. But I think to when I have sped along and ...fair enough
Dave Price

Dave,
it can depend on the insurance company/cover and/or type of car

or it did in 2002 when I got my second only speeding ticket in the county of safety cameras

42 in a 30 (stupid frustrated blip after idiot finally turned off)

speed awareness stopped at 35 or 40 I think then in Northants

first speeding ticket was in 1985 in a new Skoda (Essetle II 120) my mate said they took the chassis number as it was actually going so slow
N Atkins

Skoda jokes - they were the ones!!!
Dave Price

yeah the best joke at the time was the BMW that couldn't loose me on the B526

I had a bog standard Estelle 2, 130L except Goodyear Eagle tyres

standard BMWs were nowhere near as quick or fast as their owners made out
N Atkins

I got caught in Preston last year 36 in a 30 zone. Speed awareness day and everyone else on it had been caught doing no more than 38mph.
I once was driving a Skoda Estelle and I got overtaken....................By the back wheel!

Bernie.
b higginson

"I got overtaken....................By the back wheel!"

Yes always fun! no doubt you were skidding on the petrol tank! hence the saying "Surprising Skoda"
Dan Cusworth

That is the one huge benifit to getting old and a clean driving record....super cheap auto insurance...luckly ive never gotten a ticket for speeding, just about 3 warnings over the past 15 years....but i sure rack up the tickets for expired plates...luckly those dont count

My last speeding ticket was over 20 years ago...yeah im just that lucky

Prop
Prop

You're right there Prop. When the insurance gets cheap it makes you think twice about blowing it by speeding.

Have you abandoned your HG creation? It's awaiting your input. :)
Lawrence Slater

Only been stopped for speeding twice in 32 years, one roadside caution for 37mph, 1980 and one fine and 3 points for 52 in a 30, 1984 must have just been lucky as not many people stick to the limits in the UK. Isn't it funny how those driving slower that you are stupid and those driving faster are crazy.
P Ottewell

We need a culture change in this country to make speeding a s serious a crime as it really is.

If your were drunk and caused an accident that killed a child you would get your just deserts and no one would suggest anything other?

So if you fail a breath test before you kill someone no one gives you any sypathy and rightly so!

So why do we sypathise with someone speeding?

Someone speeding in a town centre has NO CHANCE of stopping if a child runs out in front of them and will probably kill the child! why do we not class this as a bigger crime as drink driving????
Robert (Bob) Midget Turbo

I dont often post these days but I've got to put my it in on this.

Feeling sympathetic for Dave's situation - its not right.

The last time I got nabbed on a laser gun I was doing 42 on an empty 30mph dual carriageway at midnight on a clear Autumn night...
I don't consider that a particular dangerous risk. I see people driving far more dangerously at less than 20 in the town centre and parking around schools at 4pm.
Speed doesn't cause accidents, its bad driving and bad judgment. As has been said many times, if you taught people the right judgment and appreciation of risk, speeding becomes irrelevant.

Speeding as bad as drink driving? Really Bob? Are you just being controversial because that just sounds daft to me. Yes it will reduce you ability to stop but you are in control of the vehicle in all other respects.
Why is ALL emphasis on road safety based on speed rather than inability to control a car safely!

For instance, a few months ago a kid of 13 was killed at 8pm on a local main road when a car lost control and mounted the pavement. Since then plod has been out on that spot with a speed camera handing tickets out to locals doing 35mph+ It sounds reasonable until you find out that the accident was actually caused by two drunk 14 year olds who nicked a knackered old Nissan Micra. How the hell is that crime gonna be rectified by giving tickets to otherwise legal drivers? Its shameful behaviour by the local police to generate revenue.
</rant off>
Bob T

Typical response I fear Bob and there is some merit.However there is some middle ground that can be found and once people get it out of their minds that speeding fines are simply money grabbers then the better
Why do you not consider drink driving fines as money earners?
Why do you not consider fines impossed on common thieves as money raisers?

Bob of course there are speed limits that need adjustment, that is totally another story and we should concentrate our efforts on that.

How do we ensure drunk drivers are aware of risk?
How do we ensure all drivers are aware of risk?

The one and only way it can be done is to police the limits whether drink or speed.

Alternatively Bob tell me how you can ensure drivers stick to town centre or built up area speed limits if we do not police them?
Robert (Bob) Midget Turbo

You don't accidently drink and drive, but it's easy to get caught out speeding.

When our tin machines were built, you knew, and still do, when you were going faster than 30.

Back then you needed luxury to not feel speed.

These days, pretty much every car on the road accelerates to 30+ in 1st gear before you know it. We might consider not building cars that powerful. But we don't.

As regards 20mph. You can stop pretty quick at 20. Sure if you hit somebody 30 will hurt more than 20. 20 will hurt more than 10. So why not have 10mph limits in residential areas?

How about we teach people what they seem to have forgotten. Don't step into the road if a car is coming. And dare i say it, even teach kids the same thing. Like for example don't skateboard in the road.

But on the other hand, we've only had cars for circa 100 years. Nothing says we have to have them for another 100.

I often think it strange that we are able to steer about a ton of steel and other stuff, at speeds in excess of 60mph, whilst cars pass in the other direction only a foot away from us. Are we mad? People might think so in 50 years time.

For now though I agree speed CAN kill sometimes. But given the number of times that is doesn't cause a problem, far outweighs the times that it does, I for one am glad that speed cams are being removed.


Lawrence Slater

Speeding is dangerous. It carries higher risks. But the issue is what is speeding? Exceeding an arbitrary selected speed for a particular road. If I am right, the original point was that this was an unexpected 30mph limit on a dual carriageway. So, was that a reasonable limit or not?

Why is it legal to travel nose to tail in a 3 lane, 70mph traffic jam in heavy rain on the M4, but illegal to travel at 80mph on a deserted M74 at 4am with not another car in sight for miles?

My gripe is that it is now pretty well impossible to judge what the imposed limit is on any particular stretch of road. At one time, any competent driver would understand what the limit was from assessing the road width, features, location and adjoining verges, houses, lighting columns etc. But that logic has long gone. Now if you see a camera, the instant reaction is "What's the limit here, will I get caught".

And why, where they do put up those camera picture warning signs, does the sign not include the speed limit!
Guy

Bob if the child runs out in front of a car then the offence should be on the parent (plural if you're lucky) for lack of parental control.
You'll be disappointed I'm sure to learn that I recently received 'words of advice' for a 3-figure reading on the A1 oop north late at night. Interesting conversation, he wanted to know how come I was only doing 70 by the time he caught me up (no blues); had to explain that when he accelerated hard from the cruise the headlights rose up and caused a flash in my mirror thus alerting me to a chaser upon which I slowed gently; was complimented for observation and we left like mates! He did more for police PR that night than any amount of 'initiatives'.
David Smith

All the time cameras sit flashing 24/7 regardless of conditions and then plod sits handing tickets like I pointed out above nobody will ever believe its in the name of safety. Because it's just not - its cheap policing and cash generation and corruption.
Yes, I concede speed can be a factor in accidents but its far from the only factor. You only have to watch the standard of driving generally to see what the cause of most accidents is - pillocks who can't drive.
Damn, I think I must be getting old.
Bob T

brilliant Bob - and how absolutely true !
David Smith

I think in the end it comes down to the intellagance and desision making ability of the driver...if you can regulate that, then you will have safer roads

Just the other night 2 elderly people and a child was killed when the car being driven by an 86 year old man got confused and went the wrong way on a 4 lane interstate high way killing the child in the other car... Whats sad... The 86 year old man already had 2 minor accedints confusing the brake with the gas pedal

So i dont nessarialy agree with speed... But the quality of driver judgement...ive said it before, but i belive the smarter our cars get the dumber the driver becomes

Look at mercedies E class tv comerical..."i was sound a sleep at the wheel and my car braked for me so I wouldnt butt rape the tail end of a big ol transport truck in front of me... Thanks mercedies for saving me and my childrens life....

i mean really, are you kidding me, and your still.allowed on the road with me? WHY?

Prop


Prop

When i went all stupid several weeks ago and hit 100 plus mph....i was the only thing out there... Not another car insight... No property... Houses or farm animals... Just me, and if i bite the bullet...oh well, thats life... Im sure you will all shead a tear, but in the end the only real casualtys would be my tool collection having no home...aka... No children or family to leave behind in dire straits

But had there been even a hint of another car or injury to someone else...i never would have given into the impulse

So how badly wrong was i for what i did.

Prop
Prop

So in other words then

NOBODY can find a solution to ensure that drivers obey KEY speed limits (so the status quo will remain)
However as I stated we must work on having more realistic speed limits at different times and places

It really is not hard to be sensible! LOL.

David have you actually ever been a Dad?
Bob Turbo Midget England

2 sons (1 races), 2 grandsons, no running in the road, no deaths.
David Smith

Interesting points there and of course it is hard to draw a definitive line under every situation.
As stated earlier it is hard to believe that we drive cars with a 120 mph closing speed on roads with just enough room to get past each other at times. H&S must be mad!!!

Perhaps the future will see GPS and speed limiters fitted to all cars and vehicles.
You would be limited to the maximum allowed on the stretch of road you are on and this could possibly be remotely set such as when passing through roadworks or an upcoming crash scene - to allow good easy rubbernecking to occur!!!

Police could also tap into the car and shut it down if needed!!!

We could go back 115 years and have a man with a red flag at the front warning others of our presence - midgets exempt due to noisy exhausts esp Gary and Gaps.

Its not the fact that I got caught that annoys me but where and when it was. That of course is no reason to 'knowingly' break the law. If I was the copper with the camera I would be ready to reinforce the speed message - it has made me look at road signs and where I am a little closer so perhaps it has worked.
As for the thousands of drivers with no insurance, tax etc - now there is a problem!!
dave
Dave Price

I think the other point here is, do we want to live in an ever increasingly regulated world?

Everybody understands the physics. The faster you make mass travel, the more potential there is for trouble. The word potential is key here. It's not inevitable that speeding will kill or hurt anyone.

But ok, let's assume we continue to strive to remove risk from every avenue of life (and I think sadly it's a foregone conclusion we will), then what?

There won't be any situation in which you'll be able to excercise your own judgement, or experience that feeling of doing something dangerous. I can't wait, it's sounds like great fun.

Just driving a car is dangerous. It's more dangerous than walking. Being a pedestrian is dangerous if you walk in the road. In places like the Philippines, pedestrians have almost no rights over cars. Cars lorries or busses don't stop to let walkers cross the road, they just go around you. Surprisingly few people are hit by vehicles. Everybody takes more care. It looks chaotic, and is, but it's not as dangerous as you would imagine it to be.

I'm glad we do have speed limits here, there's obviously a need.

But getting too excited about 40 in a 30, when smoking kills and injures millions more than the odd driver speeding, seems a little bit ott to me.
Lawrence Slater

Lawrence it is all about the affect we have on others.

If you want to smoke in your own home and kill yourself then that is fine, but do not smoke in public place.

However in a city centre or in an urban area, poorly trained children (mine and others I suspect but thankfully not the children of caring parents such as Smiffy's) are likely at some point to run out into the road. If the vehicle in the road is traveling slowly then chances are the child will survive, and why not!!!!!

I totally agree that speed limits need to reflect the risk, at present they generally do not but that is the problem that needs to be addressed. Policing the speed limits is the only way to ensure adherence otherwise there is no point to them and anarchy would prevail.
Bob Turbo Midget England

Lawrence as a passenger :)

"These aren't accidents they're throwing themselves into the road gladly"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WYDlX49yUSI
Nigel Atkins

I have to confess Bob, I'm in two minds here.

I live in a quiet residential road. Unfortunately it is also a through road used by traffic to avoid a more main road. (Not quite a rat run, but getting there year by year).

We already have a pathetic attempt at speed control, raised lumps in the road at t junctions. Not quite speed humps, but close. Everybody ignores them or drives on the wrong side of the road to go round them.

It would actually be safer if they weren't there.

Some residents want a 20mph limit in the road. Others want a speed cam, and others want full road humps and 15mph.

There's a school in a side road, the whole place gets very busy in the mornings, with through traffic, and school mums/dads dropping off kiddy.

I'm not sure who are the greater danger. Or rather I should say perceived danger.

Because for all the hopping up and down of the residents about wanting to control the speed of cars in the road, there hasn't been an accident in the road in the last 40 years that anyone can remember.

Now me, I'm getting fed up with the sheer volume of traffic, and yes too the speed at which some come through. But it's mostly the increasing noise from tyre slap at speed that miffs me. It used to be a lot quieter, more cars = more noise.

But I wouldn't want to get nicked for doing 25 if a 20 limit was imposed, or to have to practically stop each time i approached a road hump, as I do in some places.

Maybe there just is no other solution, other than to impose and enforce 20mph or even less everywhere.

If you want to achieve ZERO injury and death on the roads, you will pretty much have to bring traffic to a standstill, --- if you target the speed.

But just suppose you couldn't slow cars down.

Then you would have to concentrate on educating people, including children to take care.

I agree kids can be erratic and careless, just like adults, but moreso, --- but they can be taught.

In the end though, I think limits will be enforced, and we'll all have to slow down.

I wonder what motoring will look like in 50 or 100 years time.
Lawrence Slater

Nigel,

I wish I had his money, and that car lol. Great music too.:)

"These aren't accidents they're throwing themselves into the road gladly ---- to get away from all the dross "

He might be right judging by some places. :)

Lawrence Slater

one of my very favourite films

my wife works at a place which (formerly) had an art-house cinema and when they didn't get a copy of the film turn up about 5 or 6 years ago I lent my DVD copy to be screened

amazing quality a DVD has even when projected on to a commercial screen

what I didn't realise having seen the film back at it's orginal release was that my copy was of that original release rather than the edited later versions and it contained what some find a particularly offensive word

they got a letter of complaint from a chap who'd took his 90 year old mother to see 'a comedy film'

and the bl**dy projectionist put scratches on my DVD

the lady that ran the cinema had only one eye and this my wife thought was the reason she missed the fact that the monthly cinema brouchure had on a photo of a particularly explicit film that showed just a bit too much of the male lead - there was a minor fuss by the local newspaper

it's a funny old world but my wife's explantion of the lady only having one eye being the explantion made me laugh the most
Nigel Atkins

Most of the comments that have been posted make a lot of sense, but the point I agree with most is that speed limits need to be reviewed. In some cases up and in others down.
When I went on my speed awareness course,(36 in a 30 zone), I was determined to try and take something away with me from the course and put it to good use. I was quite disappointed to learn that many of my companions on the course were just there to avoid the points on their licence and get home as soon as possible.
During the classroom part of the course, we were given a scenario. "You are passing a stationary bus, you are not speeding (3omph). As you get level with the back of the bus, little Johnny steps out at the front of the bus. What do you do?" There were a few seconds of silence, then people started saying "you swerve" or "hit the bus". The instructor said, "you only do one thing, you hit him, you have no choice, thinking time plus action time exceeds the time it takes you to get to little Johnny". It had a profound effect on me and some of the others, but I'm sure that there were some people who thought it was all hypothetical rubbish.
I don't know what the real answer to the question of getting people to obey speed limits is, but I do know that excessive speed, coupled with inadequate driver skill is a dangerous cocktail. But hey, we're all great drivers aren't we? Well, aren't we?

Bernie.
b higginson

20 MPH might save one child, but we will probably harm thousands more with increased pollution due to the fact that most cars can't drop to 20 in top gear!

Trev
T Mason

<<"getting too excited about 40 in a 30">>

Actually, although I am no saint when it comes to not speeding, I do try very hard to notice and adhere to the 30 (and 20) limits. I think it would be far more serious than, for example exceeding a 70 limit on a motorway where there are (supposed to be) no pedestrians.

I find those drivers who travel at 40 on rural 60 limit roads, and then continue at 40 when passing through the villages really annoying! Crazy!!

Incidentally, children under about 50 months cannot judge speed and distance so it isn't just about parental control and teaching. Accidents do happen!
Guy

But guy, who in their right mind would let a child under 5 cross a road without supervision?

The days are long gone, in town at any rate, that you'd let a kid of 5 or under, play in a street without supervision.

I can't remember how unteachable I was at 5 or under. :)
Lawrence Slater

Lawrence. I'm afraid that I saw only today, a young mum pushing a trolley with an infant in it and a 3 year old tagging along behind completely unsupervised. Why? Because mum was on the bloody phone! The kid could have run in the road at any time in front of a non speeding driver and although it wouldn't have been the driver's fault, how would he or she have felt?
My mate saw a similar thing, where mum had crossed the road whilst phoning, leaving the kid on the kerb. My mate took the kid to his mum, pointed out what had happened and was to to "F off you interfering b*****d".

Bernie.
b higginson

Yeah, well, there is that I suppose.

And I think that does sum it all up. Other people being irresponsible, are gradually eroding the rights/freedoms of responsible people.



Lawrence Slater

It can be pretty dangerous on the pavement, too

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lNk_Zcdc02w
Dave O'Neill2

Erroding the rights of responsible people?

LOL

What rights of yours was she erroding I am curious to ask??

The RIGHT to speed in an urban area. ???

More than likely she would make an even more vague claim that you were erroding her right to be an idiot!

I am thankful for the many young children who through NO FAULT of their own are alive today because there are drivers around who have taken personal responsibility for their actions and try to obey the law for reasons of social responsibility!

I still have not heard from the doubters how they would enforce speed limits?

And finally David you are a racer, why do you think your car needs to pass scruitineering?, why do you think race circuits have run off areas? and why do we try hard to ensure safety at race circuits?

Because even though racing drivers are nice responsible adults and suberb drivers they sometimes crash!, they are hit by others and I am sure Daniel will tell us how many people present cars at scruitineering that are unsafe!! it is called enforcement of the rules!!
Robert (Bob) Midget Turbo

yes please Bob let's ask Daniel how many unsafe cars are presented at scrutineering; I expect it's a handful a year in UK - I've never seen or heard of one. You do get pulled up for being 1db over a noise limit or a year out of date on seatbelts or maybe even a duff cablepull on the killswitch but nowt else.
But that's all OT. Safe speed is all about conditions; if there's nothing else moving within half a mile then a ton is minimal risk, better comparison with a sprint event than a circuit race.
David Smith

Nobody goes out in their car expecting to have an accident. However, accidents don't happen they are caused. Most drivers do not know that they are out of control of their car until they are. Road conditions change without warning even in dry weather. Especially in these days of cutbacks, roads are not being resurfaced and potholes are not being filled in. Therefore, even if you consider that you are the best driver in the world, and lets face it most of us do, you can still be caught out. The pomposity of some of the poster hear that a child running into the road is the fault of bad parenting frankly dismays me. Every user of the roads as a duty of care for others using the roads. The older posters have a short memory of what it is like to constantly supervise toddlers, the younger ones are plainly arrogant. I just hope that the next time your child or grandchild decides to run off, it is a driver as tallented as yourself that he/she runs out in front of and you can stop in time.
P Ottewell

PO you are too new here, I was just winding Bob up (again) ;-)
David Smith

New hear yes, but not new to life. I've been on this planet for 49 years and lived through loosing friends through road accidents. I lived in a village that saw the deaths of 5 young men in 1 year in 3 head on collisions. Young men that thought they were indestructible. winding Bob up or not, this forum is public and Bob is not the only reader/poster. Too many people are injured or killed on Britain's roads to make light of it.
P Ottewell

I don't think anyone is making light of it Peter. Just putting points of view.

Actually I do think road users have rights. I do think that parents have a responsibility to prevent their kids running off into the road. Just as dog owners have.

And if I had been the hypothetical driver Bernie speculated about, I'd be mighty pissed off that because of an irresponsible parent, I was made to live with the possible death of someone on my mind.

Now I do call that an erosion of my rights to drive down the road minding my own business, free from the worry of killing somebody; child adult or other animal. :)

At no point have I or anybody said they deem it their right to speed in an urban area.

But I think we should perhaps narrow the definition of urban and set speed limits accordingly.

Yes of course drivers should exercise due care. I do. I think most drivers do. When driving in a residential area, I am always on the look out, in the spaces between parked cars for example, for the odd child or animal to appear. I know they do.

But that wasn't the start of this thread. It was about a ticket given for speeding on a road just after a motorway, not a small road next to a school in a residential area.

I don't think anybody here is demanding the right to "speed" anywhere it is likely to kill or injure anyone.

I find it strange that this debate has become a bit of an attack on the driver. Why shouldn't pedestrians be enforced to take responsibility for their own actions?

And that to me also includes parents, dog walkers, or anybody in charge of something that could suddenly appear in the path of a non speeding, and unsuspecting motorist.

Should speed limits be enforced? Yes. But what limits?

That's what the debate is really about.

Glad I wasn't that pedestrian in that vid, I reckon I'm too slow to have jumped out of the way. :)







Lawrence Slater

Here's another pedestrian having a close shave...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nzaQZy7wd88&NR=1
Dave O'Neill2

LAw.

Yes the debate was about enforcing speed limits. I personally only know of one way, and that is a ticket, to date those who call that a money grabbing machine have not suggested an alternative

We all agree with speed limits requiring to be set with consideration but we must enforce the limits when set and it is a simple question how?

David

In motor racing accidents happen why?

Because the driver misjudges his speed/ability EXACTLY the same as on the roads.

In motor racing there is a SPEEDLIMIT in the pitlane why??? for SAFETY!

What do yellow flags mean David?

In Formula 1 penalties are impossed for speeding in the pit lane why?? Because without them drivers would ignore the rules. Exactly as we do on the public roads.

And I understand from a reputable scruitineer that I would be amazed at how many vehicles are presented for scruitineering with very little brakefluid in and kill switches that don't!!!!
Bob Turbo Midget England

So it's agreed, appropriate speed limits are desirable, -- for a host of reasons, and should be enforced. Else what's the point?

So next you have to ask the question, why have speed limits at all?

The point of s/limits is to prevent or limit danger and inconvenience, to both the driver, other road users, pedestrians and animals etc.

So should ALL Limits be enforced equally?

Wherever cars and people share the same space, i.e., an unfenced road, there is going to be some element of risk to the pedestrian. As the vids show, either when crossing the road, or just walking along the pavement.

So are speed limits enough?

One answer is to fence all roads, and either tunnel or bridge the road. I was amazed at how many roads are like that even in the Philippines. To cross some roads in the central business district of Manila, you sometimes have to walk 1/4 a mile or more to find a crossing point, because so many of the roads are fenced down the centre and the sides. And these rules are enforced. This mainly to enhance traffic flow, under the guise of protecting pedestrians though.

You can pedestrianise the road, and let everybody use the spaces that was previously road space. Croydon north street is like that now. You could apply that to all residential areas.

I reckon that would be unwanted by most people though. So your left with reducing speed.

How slow?

You can argue, that at any speed, a person is at risk of injury/death when in collision with a vehicle. In which case a number of injuries or deaths are inevitable. So how much risk are we prepared to deem as acceptable?

How slow do you make the s/limit? It's a trade off, between inconvenience and acceptable death and injury. Maximum inconvenience vs. minimum death and injury.

How about enforcement?

Road humps everywhere to prevent the speed in the first place?

Cameras everywhere to catch everybody?

Penalties to act as a deterrent? Vehicle confiscation? A years salary?

And which areas do you strictly enforce this? ALL residential areas, or only those that have a history or accidents and injury?

As I said, I live in a fairly quiet residential area. We already have raised lumps in the road at T junctions. Everybody ignores them or drives on the wrong side of the road to go round them.

Some residents want full road humps and 15mph. There's a school in a side road, But for all the protestations of some of the residents about wanting to control the speed of cars in the road, there hasn't been an accident in the road in the last 40 years that anyone can remember. So should this area be treated the same as another area, and have a 20 or 25 mph limit imposed, even though there hasn't been an incident that proves it to be needed?

Whatever the solution, I don't think blanket speed limits, strictly enforced are necessary or fair, ---everywhere.

But for simplicity it would be easier to do just that, and allow no exception at all. All residential areas should be 20mph or less backed up by road humps and cameras. Any infringement of the law, and you lose your right to drive for life. End of story. Either you want people to obey the law, or you allow a bit of leeway.

You can't have both ways it seems to me. Because as we all know, human behaviour is that given an inch, we take a mile. Or more accurately, given a 2mph leeway, we'll stretch it to 5 or 10mph.







Lawrence Slater

...and why allow people to break the law three times and only lose their licence on the 4th? - because the economic and social effects of two million drivers being banned in a year would break the government and the public transport system. Why do you think all the thresholds for 'speed awareness courses' were increased this time last year? Same reason , there are too many people with 9 points on their licence. And of course if you ban all speeders first time, then the revenue from fines would fall away rapidly. There's already been a sea-change in speed limits and compliance, this will continue but it's easier to do it slowly in stages than overnight. It took 20 years after the introduction of breathalysers to make drink-driving widely socially unacceptable.
David Smith

Sometimes, in the attempts to wind up other people, it is forgotten that there are real people sat behind these stupid keyboards ....!

Especially on matters which have caused the loss of life - and no, I don't think that we can negate the number of people who die on the roads - but, I do very much agree with David on many of his points - and just hope that it's not 20 years before people take speed limits seriously - just think of how many people the idiots drink driving killed and maimed in that period.

As for scruitineers - well, there's good and bad in everything - I've seen them not even look at a battery clamp - but insist on the removal of an ABS box that was FULLY sealed in - so, there's no accounting for ignorance and stupidity - in anything!!!
rachmacb

Here you go, an example of an irresponsible parent.

No amount of law enforcement is going to make twats like this respect speed limits, or any other limits.

The best deterent in this case would be premature "youth"anasia.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/8820413/Father-filmed-pulling-wheelies-on-motorbike-while-3-year-old-sat-on-petrol-tank.html
Lawrence Slater

Yep idiot alright funny you say irresponsible parent and not irresponsible motorbike rider.

If you go on a motorcycle website or even read MC News they would report it as police harrassment and have the police got nothing better to do than pick on VERY SKILLED riders, and most probably suggest money grabbing police.

Now do you get the idea mate?
Robert (Bob) Midget Turbo

Times have changed I guess. Perceptions have changed too.

When I was about 14, I wanted know what it was like to do a ton on a bike. My Brother who's older than me, picked the best rider of his mates who he could trust to not get me killed. So I sat on the back of a tuned TriBsa, and was taken round the sidcup bypass at somewhere near a ton. No skid lid, not that it would have mattered.

Back then that was deemed ok, but even back then nobody would have pulled that telegraph reported stunt, with a kid as young as the kid in the video.

So if it's true that the MC news would have a go at the police, and support the rider in this case, then I'm a bit at a loss for an explanation.
Lawrence Slater

A freind of mine is from Blackley (pronounced Blakeley) and he knows this family. They are one of the "hard" families on their estate and known to be a bunch of complete boneheads, so young Ryan will not be the slightest bit put off by being fined. He'll just go out and do it again. Driving licences mean nothing to people like him.

Bernie.
b higginson

"He'll just go out and do it again."
not yet awhile he wont; he got 5 years 4 months inside...
David Smith

and don't get me started on mobile phones.....
P Ottewell

Or sat navs.

Why are you allowed to stare at a sat nav for directions, but not read a newspaper whilst driving a car?
Lawrence Slater

followed a bloke tonight for 3/4 of a mile in a moving traffic jam (10mph stop-start) and he was reading a report (sheaf of A4 paper stapled together) - every now and then would flick it up with left hand to turn a page over !
David Smith

And without wishing to stir it up, -- it renders useless enforcing speed limits, if people aren't even looking at the road all the time.

Maybe if people were not so distracted whilst driving, and had their attention on the road, instead of the kids in the back, the mobile, the sat nav, the morning paper, the urgent report, ---------- ?

So maybe before we ARE all forced to drive at excessively low speeds in order to prevent accidents, drivers could be made to concentrate, by enforcing the laws that say you have to pay attention whilst driving.

I dont think drinking a bottle of water or eating a choc bar is a problem, but due care and attention must cover phones, news papers, kids in the back, etc. There's even a specific law about phones, but as Pete says, it's flaunted.

How about hard labour for using a mobile phone, instead of 60 quid for 45 in a 40 zone?

Lawrence Slater

I think the only way the message is going to get across with phones is to scrap fixed penalties and apply similar penalties to drink driving.

As for sat navs it amazes me that all manufacturers seem to supply them with an illegal fitting, i.e. a sucker for the windscreen, where it is illegal to put it.

Trev
T Mason

That's true, I watched my neighbours friend the other day. Arrived in her 4x4 with her kids in the back.

Picked up my neighbours kids and put them in.

Then got out the sat nav, stuck it to the front screen with, as you say a sucker. Programmed it, and drove off.

No doubt she wouldn't have gotten lost on her way to the morgue.
Lawrence Slater

Lawrence

Next thing you know, you'll be telling me I shouldn't be using my laptop to post to the BBS while I'm on the M1

;o)
Dave O'Neill2

Not telling you Dave - that might infringe your rights!!!!!!!!!!!! LOL
Dave Price

"I shouldn't be using my laptop to post to the BBS while I'm on the M1"

I wouldn't dream of telling you not to, the BBS overrides all matters. lol:)
Lawrence Slater

This thread was discussed between 16/11/2011 and 26/11/2011

MG Midget and Sprite General index

This thread is from the archives. Join this live forum now