Warning - New Stealth Tax on Motorists! Coming to a motorway near you..........

[mdon]

It is obvious Bealine, that you have no idea of the subject that you are posting about and it seems you're a bit racist too wanting to send all the migrant workers 'back' without migrant workers the economy and health services would grind to a halt. Anyhow since you've shown yourself as an idiot I'll leave it there.

[mannyo]

I gave up speeding years ago after realising it made virtually no difference to journey times. I worked out that the difference between driving home from work on the motorway at 80-85mph and 70mph was about 10 mins extra travel time. Driving at 70mph, I arrived home less stressed and more relaxed which meant I could settle down easier in the evening.

 

My driving when I was in my early 20s was terrible, I cannot believe what I got away with. Today its different, in my late 40s I just don't see the point anymore.

 

There was another comment somewhere in the thread about speed limits outside the UK, apart from France and Germany the rest of EU land has similar limits to us.

 

UK 112KMH (70mph)

 

France 130KMH (82mph) or 120KMH (74mph) when its raining.

 

Spain (120KMH (74mph)

Belgium ,120KMH

Italy, 120KMH

 

Germany is fast losing its unlimited autobahns, they are being replaced by fixed 120KMH limits.

 

Recently Spain trialled a 110KMH limit for a full year to help the countries economy, which meant when I drove through Spain that year it added 2 hours to the whole journey down the whole country.

 

Speeding in France, Belgium and Spain has for more draconian consequences for local license holders.

 

Get caught in France for example (with a French license) twice and you loose your license for 6 months, get caught again and it can be revoked. The French have speed cameras, they also have the Gendarmes who park hidden behind bushes, mount the cameras on motorway armco etc. with no signs anywhere. Get caught by a Gendarme with a UK license and we get an on the spot fine, or if the speeding is excessive they may confiscate the car.

 

Spain has large on the spot fines, Belgium the same and there is no right of appeal. Either you pay or you are arrested and taken to a police station.

[Brimma]

I gave up speeding years ago after realising it made virtually no difference to journey times. I worked out that the difference between driving home from work on the motorway at 80-85mph and 70mph was about 10 mins extra travel time. Driving at 70mph, I arrived home less stressed and more relaxed which meant I could settle down easier in the evening.

My driving when I was in my early 20s was terrible, I cannot believe what I got away with. Today its different, in my late 40s I just don't see the point anymore.

There was another comment somewhere in the thread about speed limits outside the UK, apart from France and Germany the rest of EU land has similar limits to us.

UK 112KMH (70mph)

France 130KMH (82mph) or 120KMH (74mph) when its raining.

Spain (120KMH (74mph)

Belgium ,120KMH

Italy, 120KMH

Germany is fast losing its unlimited autobahns, they are being replaced by fixed 120KMH limits.

Recently Spain trialled a 110KMH limit for a full year to help the countries economy, which meant when I drove through Spain that year it added 2 hours to the whole journey down the whole country.

Speeding in France, Belgium and Spain has for more draconian consequences for local license holders.

Get caught in France for example (with a French license) twice and you loose your license for 6 months, get caught again and it can be revoked. The French have speed cameras, they also have the Gendarmes who park hidden behind bushes, mount the cameras on motorway armco etc. with no signs anywhere. Get caught by a Gendarme with a UK license and we get an on the spot fine, or if the speeding is excessive they may confiscate the car.

Spain has large on the spot fines, Belgium the same and there is no right of appeal. Either you pay or you are arrested and taken to a police station.

Maybe we should export a few of the posters on this thread to Europe for a few months and see how long they keep their licences

If only we could get 80% of the people to agree, that could happen

[Llanigraham]

Rubbish!

 

In a Democracy, the Law is only upheld and enforced through acceptance by the majority of the people.   Over 80% of motorway users exceed the 70 mph limit therefore the law is not enforceable.   We do not have anarchy, rather we have a government and a police force that cannot and will not accept the wishes of the citizens.   Repeatedly, by successive politicians over the years, we have been promised an 80 mph limit on motorways only for the House of Commons to fudge the issue on every occasion it has been raised.

Anarchy?   We came very close to it in the late 1980's - it could happen but right now people have been too cowed by the great recession.

 

Oh dear!

"I don't like this Law, therefore I shall break it" attitude will get you no-where in life, and perhaps it is about time you learnt that.

The Law is there, no matter what you think of it, and has been passed by a democratically elected system. Whether you agree with that system is immaterial, it's what we have have.

Grow up, sunshine!!

[KenONeill]

You might not find speeding anti-social, many people do, including myself (admittedly this research was on residential roads) http://www.reading.ac.uk/news-and-events/releases/PR3936.aspx

 

It's also worrying you think you are safe on the motorway at 80-85mph. You probably are, just so long as no other traffic at all is allowed and you are the only vehicle.

 

Speeders are a danger to all of us. It's next to drinking and driving in my mind, when things go wrong the results are very much the same in either case, yet many people see one as being ok and the other not.

 

We all know the speed limit, if you can't stick to it don't drive.

The scariest thing about this post is that you actually believe any of it (other than about speed on residential roads where there are pedestrians present).

[KenONeill]

I'm a little disappointed that you've only chose to response to 1 small part of my post but simple things for simple minds? But hey if you call things you don't understand "pseudo-science" I can forgive you.

 

So I'll explain how science works to you (it's not magic and wizards just so you know)

 

So I've hypothesized that excess speed kills. (okay? stay with me it not that hard.)

 

Now we have a statement and we need to investigate and either prove or disprove it.

So the experiment that I proposed is a 10mph tree crash and a 70mph tree crash.

 

So let identify the variables in the experiment (Now this was a long and difficult process but after 3 hours of searching I couldn't find anymore).

It turns out the only different is the speed and therefore I can now say "the only relevant factor to compare is the change in speed" (also know as Delta Speed) .

 

So what would happen in the crashes?

 

Your pseudo-science comes from the bit where you assume that hitting the tree is inevitable, and therefore that the KE of the vehicle is the risk factor, and not a consequence factor. In my driving and passengering career I have passed some tens of millions of trees, lamp standards, telephone poles and sign poles, and not one of them has even attempted to jump in front of my vehicle. Accordingly, I feel comfortable in assigning the predictable risk of this event happening a conservative 1/10_000_000.

Of course, maybe you live somewhere where wild triffids exist, but in that event I'd suggest that other triffid associated risks are probably higher than them jumping in front of vehicles!

[bealine]

It is obvious Bealine, that you have no idea of the subject that you are posting about and it seems you're a bit racist too wanting to send all the migrant workers 'back' without migrant workers the economy and health services would grind to a halt. Anyhow since you've shown yourself as an idiot I'll leave it there.

[FLAPPERJACK7]

Brothers brothers!

[Brimma]

I think the boot might be on the other foot as far as losing the debate is concerned, if that's all you can come up with

[Evil Miyagi]

So going back to the original post "A New Stealth Tax"

 

I may be wrong, but speed cameras have been around in varying forms for 20 years!!!  How can the placement of said camera on a motorway be a new stealth tax?

[BO60BYS]

What I meant was what I wrote. Take them out of the motorway system DURING DAYLIGHT HOUR'S.

 

so they can drive longer during winter... don't think you have thought this through...

[FLAPPERJACK7]

Of course we need the shelves full for Xmas. ☺

[BO60BYS]

Of course we need the shelves full for Xmas. ☺

 

Class 1 and Coach drivers are the most trained and prepared for the driving in the conditions they do, yet you have people in cars causing havoc on the motorways, when your taken on your test for either of the above it usually involves a section of motorway or dual carriage way, yet when car drivers past their test they get taken round quiet housing estates? 

[FLAPPERJACK7]

I agree with what your saying and I know the training is hard and intensive and expensive and so it should be. I at no point said hgv driver's were at any fault. I think your being defensive because I mentioned death's.

[BO60BYS]

I agree with what your saying and I know the training is hard and intensive and expensive and so it should be. I at no point said hgv driver's were at any fault. I think your being defensive because I mentioned death's.

 

Im being defensive because its a classic case of society protecting the wrong people. 

 

If someone falls over a curb and the curb is of regulated hight and every checks out that the curb weren't at fault would you remove the curb ? Or just tell the person who was clumbsy and fell over to be more careful ?

[iMatchu]

Your pseudo-science comes from the bit where you assume that hitting the tree is inevitable, and therefore that the KE of the vehicle is the risk factor, and not a consequence factor. In my driving and passengering career I have passed some tens of millions of trees, lamp standards, telephone poles and sign poles, and not one of them has even attempted to jump in front of my vehicle. Accordingly, I feel comfortable in assigning the predictable risk of this event happening a conservative 1/10_000_000.

Of course, maybe you live somewhere where wild triffids exist, but in that event I'd suggest that other triffid associated risks are probably higher than them jumping in front of vehicles!

I don't understand what you're trying to point out?

 

I've not assumed, I've stated that the tree will be hit! How else would you remove other factors in the crash?

 

Unless you're wanting to just fire cars at random in a forest and see which hit? We could end up with the result that it's the squirrels that kill.

 

So if the KE(I assume you mean Kinetic Energy) is a risk factor then the death is the consequence?

 

And as Kinetic Energy is directly proportional to speed we're still with the fact that in Speed is the "risk"

 

And yet still the same results come out of it!

 

"the risk of higher speeds increase the likelihood of death which is the consequence"?

 

Oh look it's what I was explaining in the other post!

 

Only 1/10,000,000 of trees being sentient and mobile beings with a past time of trying to catch motorists out?  so we've over 30 million cars in the UK so worrying 3 people are attacked each year by trees!?!?!

 

Wow I must go back and apologist to the people to claimed that happened to them as I for some unbeknown reason didn't trust their account of the crash.

[Brimma]

I had a bugger of a drive home the other night, bloody triffids walking down the middle of the road

Road was otherwise totally clear, therefore it would have been safe for me to speed, according to some posters, but I wouldn't have had a prayer of avoiding them if I'd been speeding

Stay safe out there, guys........there could be triffids near you

[DanHarper]

Just a quick point to all those "the law is the law" bods who think public opinion should not matter, can I just bring to the attention of the forum another thing that used to be illegal and is now not (chosen for no other reason than a recent high profile celeb marriage):

 

Homosexuality.

 

 

Look all throughout history and you'll find things that were once illegal or once legal that you'd now consider crazy. Most of these have been swayed, over time, by public opinion. You may think that we currently live in enlightened times and that every law we currently have, having been refined over 100s of years is pretty much spot on. I doubt in 50 years time those of us still around will still consider this to be the case.

[bealine]

Speed Kills!   In this case, it's the lack of speed....................

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T1EfACpX4_8

[Brimma]

Just a quick point to all those "the law is the law" bods who think public opinion should not matter, can I just bring to the attention of the forum another thing that used to be illegal and is now not

I don't disagree with your comment that laws can change, so long as it goes through the proper legislative procedure.....laws don't just change overnight

What I do take issue with is this fiction that because 80% of people choose to break a law, that that law is unlawful

If the legislation changes correctly to allow a higher speed on motorways, so be it, but until then I'm afraid that the person who posted that fiction is literally talking out of his rear orifice

[Sippo]

Speed Kills!   In this case, it's the lack of speed....................

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T1EfACpX4_8

 

I shouldn't laugh, but that blokes face is a picture. Hope he got out ok...

[iMatchu]

Speed Kills!   In this case, it's the lack of speed....................

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T1EfACpX4_8

Or maybe just maybe it was the lack of observation?

Would of the truck moved over if he had seen him? No! 

 

And to me he look alive and rather shocked in that video rather than dead....

 

Losing the debate? make outrageous comments and try to make up stuff that rubbishes the others while using evidence that doesn't support your case!

 

You really are getting desperate, just admit you're wrong and stop digging a hole for yourself- you've been completely out classed and out witted with this argument.

 

or will we have to get Jezza to come and tell you to stop arguing?  haha :sun:

[bealine]

Or maybe just maybe it was the lack of observation?

Would of the truck moved over if he had seen him? No! 

 

And to me he look alive and rather shocked in that video rather than dead....

 

Losing the debate? make outrageous comments and try to make up stuff that rubbishes the others while using evidence that doesn't support your case!

 

You really are getting desperate, just admit you're wrong and stop digging a hole for yourself- you've been completely out classed and out witted with this argument.

 

or will we have to get Jezza to come and tell you to stop arguing?  haha :sun:

 

No more arguments - I promise!   I will continue to believe what I believe and let those that want to go back to Victorian times do so.  

Edited 22 January, 2015 by bealine

[Huskoda]

Ladies and gentlemen, this is Chewbacca. Chewbacca is a Wookiee from the planet Kashyyyk. But Chewbacca lives on the planet Endor. Now think about it; that does not make sense!

[keystonedriving]

The argument has been put forward that 'every other country in Europe has agreed that 80mph is a safe speed on motorways and therefore so should we'.  Is it not the case that our lower limits might be one of the reasons why we have lower fatality and serious injury rates than the vast majority of countries around the world?  The countries which do better than us tend to have even lower speed limits, by the way.  Interestingly the biggest drop in our figures recently was between 2008 and 2010, the fatality figure went down by about 25%.  With the recession and a 50% increase in fuel costs we were driving a bit less but also driving significantly slower.  It might have been wallet driven, but it had a huge safety spin off.  Initial figures (unofficial) suggest that the number of fatalities in 2014 will be higher than in 2013, speeds are starting to rise again so that's not entirely unexpected.

 

I will normally be travelling at about 60 to 62 on a motorway, I like the idea of using less fuel - at that speed I am saving about 15%, and I have a lot more company at around that speed than some posters on this thread might imagine.  

 

By the way, the laws of physics dictate that whilst speed may not be the major factor in causing RTIs it will ALWAYS be a major factor in determining the outcome.  The faster you are going when you crash, the more it's going to hurt.

 

Don't forget that your stopping distance goes up exponentially, double your speed - four times the stopping distance, triple your speed - nine times the stopping distance.  At the point where you would stop from 70mph, from 80 mph you are still doing 39mph, from 90mph you are still doing 57mph and from 100mph you are still doing 71mph (and those are minimum figures).  It may only be 'a little bit over', but where the damage is done the difference will be far more dramatic.  In any event, how many people can accurately judge how far it will take them to stop from motorway speeds, legal or otherwise?

 

Those who choose to consider themselves above the law may perceive that 'everybody' routinely does it, the truth is rather different.  There are many drivers who do stick to the limits, to the best of their ability.