Whinging Boy Racers Again

Discussion in 'Current Affairs' started by Nutty, May 5, 2008.

Welcome to the Navy Net aka Rum Ration

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial RN website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:

  1. I see the Boy Racers, lets kill ourselves on a sunny Sunday brigade are moaning about speed cameras again.

    Racers

    If you do not like speed cameras don't speed. It is not rocket science is it, even these middle age bikers can work this one out.

    Of course car drivers are more sane, how do you ID this passenger and the driver does not have to name him.

    Mooner


    Go to 600ft shut off for attack

    Nutty
     
  2. Nutty, I moan about speed cameras. Every day going to and from work i pass through a section with them. The speed limit is 40, in the several miles leading up to them on the way to work the average speed is about 40 (give or take a couple of mph), not so bad you would think, then we hit the cameras, and a couple of times a week speed immediately drops to sub 30mph often drastically. This will eventually cause an accident.
     
  3. Nutty,

    The thing is that some areas (or police forces?) use speed cameras simply to catch people out.

    I used to drive regularly from Newcastle to Scotland and took the Coldstream road as it was easier driving/more scenic than the A1. In the middle of nowhere, not a house to be seen for miles let alone a school or hospital there was a speed camera " trap". Why? The only reason can be that it was to raise revenue. The A1 - same area, same police force is covered with accident black spot signs and number of death totals but nothing on this road so one presumes it is reasonably safe.

    Best one of all however was when I was stopped in my 1950s classic car by a young PC who gave me a ticked for having no seat belts (which were never fitted originally)!!!!!!

    As you are no doubt aware he was wrong.

    McC
     
  4. I happen to know the two sections of road you refer to quite well, and they are known to be bad roads for serious accidents, the two of then are resposible for a fair proportion of Lothian and Borders plods fatal accident statistics. Equally the Northumrian sections have been bad for accidents since before the cameras were even invented, in fact before there was even a speed limit.

    I think many police forces are getting concerned about the rate at which the born again bikers are writing themselves off. LBP is certainly paying much more attention to bikers on the smaller country roads than they used to do. Of course the more sensible bikers get pissed off at this extra attention but it is the numpries in their own community that are the cause not the plods who would far arther be doing something else.
     
  5. I hate speed cameras as much as the next person. They seem to generate increasing amounts of revenue which goes into a black hole and doesn't appear to be used for anything more than putting up even more speed cameras. Notwithstanding that I wonder just what the average accident statistics are in many of these areas before and after the fit. Are they actually helping to prevent accidents?

    SF
     
  6. Speed cameras dont catch dangerous drivers, drink drivers, drivers with no docs, etc etc.
    What they do very well though is catch people for speeding by only a fewmiles an hour. Who in general are not causing any danger to themselves or other road users.
    Yet they seem to be the police and govenments answer to making the roads safe.
    I understand some speed cameras are justified. But many i feel are not.
    To make the roads safe invest in more traffic cops who can catch speeders and all the above mentioned criminals.
     
  7. mixed results on that one SF, and apparently some guberment massaging of figures, but found this little snippet

    taken from http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/magazine/6571257.stm
     
  8. SPEED DOES NOT KILL!!! BAD DRIVING DOES!!!!

    When will people in this fvcking country get that simple fact through their thick skulls.
     
  9. Nope its the sudden lack of speed that is the real killer.

    But to be serious, Oil Slick has a point to a certain extent, poor driving skills, lack of attention to the road and conditions, poorly maintained vehicle, all these play a part in the number of accidents on our roads.
     

  10. There ya go… 'if 'Speed kills', the German Autobahns would be the most lethal roads on planet Earth, well they are not.

    I find them FAR safer than the supposedly 'safe' roads we drive on monitored by 'Safety Cameras', rather than a Herr Polizei in his BMW who will bust your arse for any sign of poor or bad driving he witness's.
     
  11. I learnt to drive last year, and remember having a discussion about poor drivers on the road. Part of the problem is most people think they are 'above average' drivers (which is statistically impossible!)

    One solution would be to have regular assessments of driving skills - conducted by driving instructors, (the test places are already backed up for weeks but instructors are crying out for business) and if they fail the assessment a second time, then they are referred to a full retest.

    Problems with this could be money grabbing instructors who deliberatly fail the first assessment to get another one, and they would get paid for the retest in their car. Likewise bribery during an assessment.

    But its a start of an idea!
     
  12. Figures are from 2001, cannot seem to find more recent ones, although it seems GB has dropped to 6th place in 07

    Data for figure 12.24
    Road deaths: EU comparison, 20011
    Rate per 100,000 population
    United Kingdom 6.1
    Netherlands 6.2
    Sweden 6.2
    Denmark 8.1
    Finland 8.4
    Germany 8.5
    Ireland 10.7
    Italy 11.1
    Austria 11.9
    France 13.8
    Spain 13.8
    Belgium 14.5
    Luxembourg 15.9
    Greece 19.3
    Portugal 21.0
    1 Data for Portugal, Greece and Italy are for 2000.
    Source: Department for Transport
     
  13. The interesting thing about speed, or "safety" cameras is that the money generated goes back into the road safety budget.

    Fair do's thinks Mr motorist, not a stealth tax, not lining somebody's pockets.

    However, if Mr mobile camera catches enough people, there will be money and justification enough to buy another camera and employ an operator, so the man has created a job for somebody else as well as cementing his own. If the now two camara men catch enough people speeding ,then more cameras, operators, and then supervisors, managers, operations directors etc will be needed. To keep employing these people will require funds. Where will they keep coming from then, if the traffic is slowed at the accident black spots? This is afterall, what we are told, is trying to be achieved. If THAT is so, why does my GPS not bleep for an accident black spot everytime I see a mobile camera?
     
  14. Grubber
    I believe you are confusing the term Accident Black spots with Revenue Cash spots.
    Having driven for many years it seems to me that the camera's are normally sited where they will collect most money not where speed needs to be controlled.
    In Llangennech their is a speed camera mounted part way down the hill at the beginning of the village. Now all the locals including the boy racers know where it is and brake to bring their speed down to 30. The next camera is as you leave the village shortly before the speed limit changes from 30 to 40.
    This camera is sited after the school, surely it should be sited before the school?
    Of course the only people caught are visitors, the boy racers slow for the camera then accelerate.
     
  15. I agree that bad driving is a potential killer but to say that speed doesn't kill is ridiculous. To break it down if a normal person gets behind the wheel of a car and drives from A to B whilst observing the speed limit and adhering to all known rules and courtesies of the road then it is most likely that he will not become involved in an accident.

    Altering any aspect of this could bring on circumstances that will. Speed is, IMHO, the most likely aspect to result in an accident. It doesn’t matter how good a driver you think you are, you cannot account for any others who enter the equation and reactions are always slowed or hampered if there is less time for them to be effectively deployed.

    QED really.

    SF
     
  16. Right GET THIS YOU SHEEPLIKE MASSES

    SPEED CAMERAS DO NOT LESSEN DEATHS ON OUR ROADS

    Do not blame us bikers, with incredibly fast machines, most deaths are caused by poor driving wether too fast or not.

    Speed Cameras do not ******* work, in fact Nutty for all your wonderful thoughtful posts on this forum you severely lost the plot on this one. In fact being a biker has made me a far more safer and thoughtful cage driver.
     

  17. Per mile driven, Motorways are the safest roads in Britain and most accident occur under 30MPH
     
  18. I think the more pertinent point is appropriate speed. It's a given that speed is a factor in accidents, after all if all actors are stationary then there isn't going to be an accident.

    When I did the fast driving course a lot of the discussion was around picking the right speed for the weather and road conditions, the state of the driver and the material state of the vehicle. The maximum appropriate speed may be higher than the speed limit but it may not be. Unfortunately many people wheel out the statistic about the percentage of accidents where speed was considered a significant contributory factor without any indication of what that speed might have been and what the other factors were. There is no way to judge whether the speed was within the posted limits or not.

    But to the main point of this thread, as a rider I don't have a big issue with the janitors targeting sunday morning ride-outs. I saw a breakdown of some of the figures from about four years ago and they seemed to indicate that mid-week accidents tended to be slow speed bumps, cars hitting bikes etc, the kind of thing that's going to happen when commuting. Rarely fatal and generally walk-away. Weekend accidents tended to be higher speed with a greater incidence of serious injury.

    All that said I do agree that cameras are a poor replacement for proper policing, they can't assess appropriate speed, bad or dangerous riding or driving etc.
     

  19. BINGO!!!! Common sense at last!!!

    And here's a thing, Bikers, ( I used to be one), are proof positive of POOR DRIVING being the issue. Bikes are fast… VERY fast but if your a crap rider you will have an off in no time.

    Good rider? No problem with a 180mph bike

    Shit rider, Even a 20mph moped will have you on your arse.
     
  20. To say speed kills, you have to llok at the circumstances. Speed is a contributory factor in a lot of accidents, but most accidents happen at peak times when road traffic is at a maximum. During these times speed should be kept to permitted limits, no problem with that at all. What Police officers can (and do) do, is look at the conditions and traffic levels during the occurance and apply common sense judgement as to whether the speeding is causing any real danger to other road users (if indeed there are any other road users at that time).

    A friend of mine was caught speeding whilst on his way home for the weekend one time. The letter containing his penalty notice was lost in the post and had to be delivered by hand, by a local policeman. When my friend asked the copper if HE would have booked him for overtaking a caravan at 80MPH on the only (and short) stretch of dual carriageway for 10 miles, guess what the answer was? Unsuprisingly, it was no. But the cold fish "safety" camera operator caught him anyway.

    For the record, I have 3 points, given to me, in person, by a Police officer and thouroughly deserved them. Give us less cameras and more coppers.
     

Share This Page