Speed enforcement system in the UK is unfair, Split from hijacked thread |
Speed enforcement system in the UK is unfair, Split from hijacked thread |
Sun, 22 Apr 2018 - 14:39
Post
#1
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 11 Joined: 30 Dec 2017 Member No.: 95,732 |
Nobody should trust the accuracy of these laser devices, especially after this episode:
https://youtu.be/LKySmZeT9NA If there was no dash cam evidence, the driver would have been banned unfairly. The problem is that the system in the UK is created in a way to induce fear to drivers "oh, don't go to court, the laser is always right" or "oh, the officer wouldn't make that figure up, the officer is always right". I would say that most of the speed enforcement system in the UK is a cash cow. And I say that because I have a hot hatch (Audi S3) and I've never had a speeding ticket. One of my female colleagues drives a basic DS3 like miss daisy, she's been caught twice this year, one at 39 in a 30 dual carriage way (just ridiculous speed limit considering the road layout) and 45 on a 40 zone. Both with laser devices. On the first occasion she's told me that she doesn't even remember seeing a van, she hasn't even seen a photograph, she was so scared that she went to the SAC immediately without question. On the second fine, she was absolutely gobsmacked, 3 points and £100. I agree that speed limits should always be enforced however the enforcement must be reasonable, it should be limited to dangerous sections (e.g. X number of fatalities used as reference) of a certain road, or in critical areas such as schools, or areas with heavy presence of pedestrians etc. Why targeting for example the M6 toll at 3 am where you can drive safely at 100 MPH? On this context, Germany is years away from any other country. |
|
|
Advertisement |
Sun, 22 Apr 2018 - 14:39
Post
#
|
Advertise here! |
|
|
|
Sun, 22 Apr 2018 - 15:03
Post
#2
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 33,610 Joined: 2 Apr 2008 From: Not in the UK Member No.: 18,483 |
Cool story bro.
-------------------- Moderator
Any comments made do not constitute legal advice and should not be relied upon. No lawyer/client relationship should be assumed nor should any duty of care be owed. |
|
|
Sun, 22 Apr 2018 - 15:04
Post
#3
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 1,423 Joined: 15 Apr 2009 From: Winnersh, UK Member No.: 27,840 |
Was it really 45 in a 40? Enforcement of 40 limits generally starts at 46
|
|
|
Mon, 23 Apr 2018 - 12:15
Post
#4
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 38,006 Joined: 3 Dec 2010 Member No.: 42,618 |
I agree that speed limits should always be enforced however the enforcement must be reasonable, it should be limited to dangerous sections (e.g. X number of fatalities used as reference) of a certain road, or in critical areas such as schools, or areas with heavy presence of pedestrians etc. Why targeting for example the M6 toll at 3 am where you can drive safely at 100 MPH? What you are arguing is contradictory. If speed limits are to have the force of law 24/7, you cannot argue against enforcement if you're caught speeding. I wouldn't disagree with the speed limit on the motorway being lifted to 100 mph, or removed altogether, in the dead of night when there's no-one around, but that is a political point for which you need to lobby your MP / the Department for Transport. But for as long as the speed limit is 70, the police are entitled (and arguably duty-bound) to enforce it, if they're on patrol at 3 am and someone goes flying past at 100+, you can hardly expect them to ignore it. Nor can they deliberately "not-target" certain roads at certain times. If, for example, it became known that speed enforcement will never take place at such and such a time on such and such a road, that would be tantamount to giving a free pass to everyone who wants to see how fast their car will go. They must leave in place the risk for a potential speeder that, no matter how unlikely it may be, there is always a chance that there *might* be a speed trap on the road ahead. Their job is to enforce the laws that we the people, through Parliament, ask them to enforce. As for the accuracy of enforcement, the video in question is worrying, but it does not show a systemic issue. I drive ten of thousands of miles a year and I've never had such problems, and I don't think it's jut cos I'm the lucky one. I'm not convinced it's a one-off, but just looking on this forum you can clearly see it's rare for posters to say "100% hand on heart I was not speeding", and for most of those who do say that, it is often the case that they were caught at a different place to where they think they were caught. -------------------- If you would like assistance with a penalty charge notice, please post a thread on https://www.ftla.uk/index.php
|
|
|
Mon, 23 Apr 2018 - 12:28
Post
#5
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 41,510 Joined: 25 Aug 2011 From: Planet Earth Member No.: 49,223 |
...I have a hot hatch (Audi S3) Well more luke-warm ...but has a speedo and an accelerator like most cars so can either speed or not. -------------------- RK=Registered Keeper, OP=Original Poster (You!), CoFP=Conditional Offer of Fixed Penalty, NtK=Notice to Keeper, NtD=Notice to Driver
PoFA=Protection of Freedoms Act, SAC=Safety Awareness Course, NIP=Notice of Intended Prosecution, ADR=Alternative Dispute Resolution PPC=Private Parking Company, LBCCC=Letter Before County Court Claim, PII=Personally Identifiable Information, SAR=Subject Access Request Private Parking - remember, they just want your money and will say almost anything to get it. |
|
|
Mon, 23 Apr 2018 - 12:56
Post
#6
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 56,199 Joined: 9 Sep 2003 From: Warwickshire Member No.: 317 |
If, for example, it became known that speed enforcement will never take place at such and such a time on such and such a road, that would be tantamount to giving a free pass to everyone who wants to see how fast their car will go. Ironically there is a stretch of Mway near me that is well known locally to never be patrolled/enforced and I know of a number of people who have done just that, in fact that same road has been used in that manner since it opened in the 1960's! It also happens to have one of the best safety records of any Mway in the UK (no I'm not suggesting its safer due to the speeds that are common on it) going about 25 years without a fatality until last year. -------------------- There is no such thing as a law abiding motorist, just those who have been scammed and those yet to be scammed!
S172's Rookies 1-0 Kent Council PCN's Rookies 1-0 Warwick Rookies 1-0 Birmingham PPC PCN's Rookies 10-0 PPC's |
|
|
Mon, 23 Apr 2018 - 20:27
Post
#7
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 3,306 Joined: 4 Mar 2017 Member No.: 90,659 |
The fact that you think it is safe to drive at 100mph on a motorway at any time is probably a perfect example of why speed limits are needed.
Speed in itself isn't dangerous but your closing speed with other road users is, which is exactly why there are different limits on urban and rural roads. Other drivers will not expect you to be driving at 100mph, and thus will almost certainly misjudge whether it is safe to change lane to overtake. |
|
|
Mon, 23 Apr 2018 - 20:54
Post
#8
|
||||
Webmaster Group: Root Admin Posts: 8,205 Joined: 30 Mar 2003 From: Wokingham, UK Member No.: 2 |
The fact that you think it is safe to drive at 100mph on a motorway at any time is probably a perfect example of why speed limits are needed. Speed in itself isn't dangerous but your closing speed with other road users is, which is exactly why there are different limits on urban and rural roads. Other drivers will not expect you to be driving at 100mph, and thus will almost certainly misjudge whether it is safe to change lane to overtake. I do wonder what world you live in if you think it's exceptional to encounter a vehicle travelling at 100mph on a motorway, or that it could never be safe. -------------------- Regards,
Fredd __________________________________________________________________________
|
|||
|
||||
Mon, 23 Apr 2018 - 21:09
Post
#9
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 33,610 Joined: 2 Apr 2008 From: Not in the UK Member No.: 18,483 |
I did 115 on a single lane A road at the weekend. Nobody died...
-------------------- Moderator
Any comments made do not constitute legal advice and should not be relied upon. No lawyer/client relationship should be assumed nor should any duty of care be owed. |
|
|
Tue, 24 Apr 2018 - 09:07
Post
#10
|
|
Member Group: Life Member Posts: 24,214 Joined: 9 Sep 2004 From: Reading Member No.: 1,624 |
I do wonder what world you live in if you think it's exceptional to encounter a vehicle travelling at 100mph on a motorway, or that it could never be safe. The clue is in his avatar (and the stuff he posts). -------------------- Andy
Some people think that I make them feel stupid. To be fair, they deserve most of the credit. |
|
|
Tue, 24 Apr 2018 - 09:25
Post
#11
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 1,333 Joined: 28 Mar 2014 From: Corby Member No.: 69,758 |
The fact that you think it is safe to drive at 100mph on a motorway at any time is probably a perfect example of why speed limits are needed. Speed in itself isn't dangerous but your closing speed with other road users is, which is exactly why there are different limits on urban and rural roads. Other drivers will not expect you to be driving at 100mph, and thus will almost certainly misjudge whether it is safe to change lane to overtake. I've been travelling at 145mph on a motorway and was still overtaken with vigour. I'm still alive, and so are the passengers who were in the car with me. |
|
|
Tue, 24 Apr 2018 - 10:57
Post
#12
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 13,735 Joined: 22 Oct 2007 Member No.: 14,720 |
The fact that you think it is safe to drive at 100mph on a motorway at any time is probably a perfect example of why speed limits are needed. Speed in itself isn't dangerous but your closing speed with other road users is, which is exactly why there are different limits on urban and rural roads. Other drivers will not expect you to be driving at 100mph, and thus will almost certainly misjudge whether it is safe to change lane to overtake. I've been travelling at 145mph on a motorway and was still overtaken with vigour. I'm still alive, and so are the passengers who were in the car with me. Cool. -------------------- |
|
|
Tue, 24 Apr 2018 - 11:20
Post
#13
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 3,306 Joined: 4 Mar 2017 Member No.: 90,659 |
If you'd seen the damage that a high speed crash does to a patient in resus - and the hospital I work at gets ambulances from the M40 north of Stokenchurch so it's not an uncommon occurrence - then you would know that your body does not appreciate crashing or being crashed into at that speed.
Speaking to the police one of the most common causes is someone pulling out from lane 1 to 3 to overtake a middle lane driver and getting smashed from behind. It is simple statistics and physics, if you travel at that speed you are more likely to have a crash, it is more likely to be serious and you are more likely to severely injure/kill someone else. Because you drive at that speed without incident on a statistically insignificant number of occasions does not mean it there was not a higher risk of something going wrong. |
|
|
Tue, 24 Apr 2018 - 11:23
Post
#14
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 56,199 Joined: 9 Sep 2003 From: Warwickshire Member No.: 317 |
On the flip side, I remember this 1998 case well (the crash was about 4 miles from my house), driver found guilty of dangerous driving for doing 100mph.
https://www.thefreelibrary.com/Crash+driver...%27.-a060784134 -------------------- There is no such thing as a law abiding motorist, just those who have been scammed and those yet to be scammed!
S172's Rookies 1-0 Kent Council PCN's Rookies 1-0 Warwick Rookies 1-0 Birmingham PPC PCN's Rookies 10-0 PPC's |
|
|
Tue, 24 Apr 2018 - 12:33
Post
#15
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 41,510 Joined: 25 Aug 2011 From: Planet Earth Member No.: 49,223 |
It is simple statistics and physics, if you travel at that speed you are more likely to have a crash, it is more likely to be serious and you are more likely to severely injure/kill someone else.... Indeed, it's about where the bar is set. After all, the logical conclusion is that by reducing the limit will reduce the accidents/injuries so a 0mph limit eradicates the problem entirely. However, wherever the bar is set there's always someone that disagrees. Personally I think many limits should be higher and then harsher penalties for exceeding those. Commonsense policing would be better too as opposed to the perceived 'money making scheme' from automated enforcement. -------------------- RK=Registered Keeper, OP=Original Poster (You!), CoFP=Conditional Offer of Fixed Penalty, NtK=Notice to Keeper, NtD=Notice to Driver
PoFA=Protection of Freedoms Act, SAC=Safety Awareness Course, NIP=Notice of Intended Prosecution, ADR=Alternative Dispute Resolution PPC=Private Parking Company, LBCCC=Letter Before County Court Claim, PII=Personally Identifiable Information, SAR=Subject Access Request Private Parking - remember, they just want your money and will say almost anything to get it. |
|
|
Tue, 24 Apr 2018 - 12:50
Post
#16
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 350 Joined: 18 Mar 2015 Member No.: 76,324 |
Motorways account for roughly 21% of road traffic, yet only account for around 4% of accidents. And not all of those are going to be to with speed, the number of lorry/car collisions due to lorry blind spots side swiping on a lane change I've seen (and it's happened to me as well) is staggering. So while I'll agree that going really quite fast on a motorway is more dangerous than sticking to the speed limit statistically, in the scope of things, it probably does not impact the figures all that much.
Akin to saying the chance of suffering X disease has shot up 1000%, but then the figures are actually going from 1 in a billion to 10 in a billion, it still isn't really very bad. |
|
|
Tue, 24 Apr 2018 - 12:52
Post
#17
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 425 Joined: 4 Aug 2014 From: In the beautiful Chilterns Member No.: 72,309 |
It is simple statistics and physics, if you travel at that speed you are more likely to have a crash, I've driven over 100mph many times, never had a crash. I've driven below 15mph many times had 2 (no fault) crashes. Statistically speaking I am safer if I drive over 100mph. -------------------- Speed does not kill. It's more to do with how you stop.
|
|
|
Tue, 24 Apr 2018 - 13:03
Post
#18
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 1,333 Joined: 28 Mar 2014 From: Corby Member No.: 69,758 |
|
|
|
Tue, 24 Apr 2018 - 18:12
Post
#19
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 38,006 Joined: 3 Dec 2010 Member No.: 42,618 |
The fact that you think it is safe to drive at 100mph on a motorway at any time is probably a perfect example of why speed limits are needed. Speed in itself isn't dangerous but your closing speed with other road users is, which is exactly why there are different limits on urban and rural roads. Other drivers will not expect you to be driving at 100mph, and thus will almost certainly misjudge whether it is safe to change lane to overtake. At 3am on a lit, straight stretch of empty motorway, with a couple miles of visibility, 100 mph cannot sensibly be described as dangerous. Closing speed with what? What other road users? What the heck are you on about? Besides on many stretches of German autobahn 100 mph is a somewhat pedestrian speed, if you drop below 110 you end up with a queue of annoyed people behind you. -------------------- If you would like assistance with a penalty charge notice, please post a thread on https://www.ftla.uk/index.php
|
|
|
Tue, 24 Apr 2018 - 20:24
Post
#20
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 3,306 Joined: 4 Mar 2017 Member No.: 90,659 |
If you are driving at 100mph and you are not passing any other vehicles on a UK motorway even at 3am then you are not very observant.
|
|
|
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: Friday, 29th March 2024 - 11:25 |