- Joined
- Jul 12, 2011
- Messages
- 13,298
- Location
- Near Salisbury
- Car
- MX5 1.8 Sport, Range Rover 5.0 SC, BMW X1
Completely agree with this and indeed many of your comments, We are actually in agreement on the vast majority of comments in these posts, unfortunately it is difficult to get the correct context in "text"You make that decision all the time when you drive. Overtaking is a prime example, you overtake when its clear to do so. 99999/100000 times this will go to plan, however, the person you overtake make swerve at hit you for no apparent reason. You've taken the steps to make sure the maneuver is safe, but you've still been in a collision. This is my very own experience of two weeks ago.
I took steps to make sure I was not endangering myself and others, signaled in good time, made my move when it was clear, car well positioned and suitably lit for the time of the day.
My point is what, well, you cannot control the actions of others. I think the rioting in London also proves that point, you can minimize your risk to others stupidity but you cannot eradicate it.
I am not doubting any of the above, most of us drive on the motorway in good weather at around 80ph, it has become the de facto speed limit for the majority but if want to minimize your risk then driving at excessive speed is not the way to do it. By excessive I mean over 100mph as most people on UK roads are simply not attuned to other vehicles coming up at these speeds. Of course there wil always be idiots who drive well within the limits who are dangerous
So if 70 and 71 pose the same risk, why limit. You have to draw the line in the sand somewhere and come up with an arbitrary figure. That figure is higher in Germany, higher in France, Spain, Italy, etc. Are we perhaps being over cautious. I posed the question about crashing at 70mph and 120mph. Both speeds if a complete collision with a barrier will result in instant death, so what is the difference if once car is doing 70 and the other 120. If they both crash, they both die...I really do not want to get into a debate on this but that statement is just not true, there are so many other factors involved in a crash being survivable. A lot of vehicles do crash at 70mph plus and the occupants sometimes survive. I remember an incident some years ago where an SLK rolled at 140mph on an autobahn and the driver came out with minor bruising.
Regarding the new forest, if you find it so dangerous to drive there, why drive there? Have you taken steps to contact your local police force, your local MP to raise the issue of excessive speed? Have you tried to do ANYTHING about it other than raise it here. I can think of an area in Helensburgh where double parking causes a major hazard, so I take a different route when there is an event on. Others just complain about it. I've contacted the local MP and police about the issue. Nothing has been done, but no one can say I didn't try.
Why not drive there? do you suggest we let some idiots behaviour make us change how we live? In answer to your question yes I and others have contacted the Police and the MP's covering the area as I have on two occasions recently had to assit in clearing away and humanely despatching two ponies and a cow hit by by speeding drivers, We know they were speeding as one was chased and caught by the Police who recorded him travelling at speeds in excess of 85mph.
I'll give you a different analogy. I took the train to work once this winter (which to me is thoroughly unpleasant, I detest doing it), I knew the roads would not be gritted and I could probably try and make it, the odds of someone else getting it wrong that day would pose too great a risk to my safety and well being-i.e. the chances of being in a collision were too high for my liking. I took the train and reduced my risk. If other people want to crash into each other and kill each other, let them was my thought process, I'll take a side seat...
Once the roads were cleared, I drove, at a much more sedate pace than I would in the summer. And I still hit black ice, but I knew there was a chance of that and drove slower to compensate. Looking back, I may take the train more often this winter, as really, some of the conditions are really vile and the chances of a knock are higher.
Not sure what point this is making?
Vice versa you cannot wrap people up in cotton wool either. There is a real world out there. Part of being human is getting it wrong, no matter what the consequence may be. Its a part of life.
Never suggested this, see my coments on regukation etc.
For those who have no rational judgement, there is life beyond the road. Something else will get them. They may take up this "planking hobby" that is gripping Australia. Let them. We have laws and speed limits and I do take your point, you are not born knowing this and people do need guidance, as the majority of them are pretty stupid.
However are traffic cars hiding in laybys (on roads which are safe to travel a little above the NSL) and giving chase to someone who is not a danger to anyone really the answer. Are hiding cameras behind signs on good overtaking spots really the answer? No, its a money raising exercise.
A thing I liked were signs on the A93 saying how many people died in specific sites over a year. THAT made you think about your speed and actions a lot more than a hidden camera taking £60 of your hard earned. Yes, we should see more of these!
There comes a time, when enough people break a minor law, that it becomes decriminalized. Consider Americas policy on Alcohol, our near decriminalizing of canibis.
Would it be so bad if the motorway NSL became 80 just because that become the norm?
Have a good evening, I am going to damage a few more liver cells with a cheeky litltle claret
Last edited:
