The Exploitation Of People

Original posting, October 2006

Apparently, according to the newspapers(!), we all creep over the speed limit from time to time and getting caught will provide a heavy fine, penalty points, increased insurance premiums or, for persistent offenders, loss of license altogether. The main reason for having road laws is to make money.

Something to look forward to, then.

And according to the advertising "the road safety myth" goes something like this: enforcement of motoring laws often has little or nothing to do with road safety. It's all about money, money, money. This from the co-author (retired traffic police officer) of a book implying that speeding is OK. This author is not attempting to make money, of course, but just promoting road safety. Maybe it's more profitable working on behalf of the offender than trying to stop people offending. But apparently it's all about government making money, not about making roads safer on the ever increasingly crowded British roads.

A full page advert in a Sunday paper

doesn't come cheap. Such

laudable altruism

This whole issue highlights one major problem. The rotten attitude of some British drivers. That they actually think it's morally acceptable to speed. Speed limits are imposed for a reason. If you exceed that limit then you should expect to get caught and be prosecuted. If you use the roads, it is your responsibility to know the speed limit for the zone in which you are driving.

Hint: if there is no explicitly indicated speed limit in a speed restricted zone (not motorway, dual carriageway etc), then it's 30mph.

30mph

And a speed limit never means a safe speed. Just a maximum speed.

• The 'logic' seems to argue that speeding nearby to schools, across the zebra crossing, down a high street, along any road that has both parked cars and pedestrians (a known hazard), minor roads joining major roads (any junction, in fact) is all about money and not safety.

• These are indicators that should make people aware of speed. Especially their own. Sadly, this only happens sometimes. Or so it seems.

If you believe you can inadvertently 'creep' over a speed limit, then impose a lesser limit on yourself of 27mph in a 30mph zone, 37 mph in a 40mph zone for just a couple of instances. It also assumes that you care.

You can then only 'creep'

 up to the legal speed limit

'Rocket science' is difficult.

• If you're not sure about a speed limit then assume it's 30mph.
• If it's 40mph there is frequent signage. Maybe even BIG numbers painted in the road.
• If it's 50mph there's frequent signage. Maybe even BIG numbers painted in the road.  Otherwise, it's 60mph unless on a dual carriageway or motorway where it's 70mph.

That's it. The maximum anywhere on British roads is 70mph.

Maximum anywhere = 70mph

Drivers make an easy target, even when speeding. The report actually equates speeding in a potentially lethal vehicle to shoplifting. Incredible. And so... stupid. A car at any speed is potentially lethal. Shoplifting is wrong certainly, but it is not likely to endanger life (under normal circumstances). A shoplifter gets little more than a 'slap on the wrist' while a 'speeder' gets substantially more. If and when caught.

It's so unfair for the unfortunate speed merchant.

If there is a real problem, it is that the law is weak by loading the evidential proof required in death by dangerous driving, or even serious injury, so much that it favours the driver. It's almost a case of the pedestrian who 'hit my car at 46mph' in a 30mph speed restricted zone.

Joke?
Pathetically and tragically: no.

Well, clearly discouraging driving is not meant to happen. The real source of money is keeping people driving, of course, but any transgression should result in an automatic ban. A drink driver is banned and this strongly suggests that driving while under the influence of alcohol is more dangerous than being 'in control' of a speeding vehicle. Whether or not under the influence. Drunk driving and while simultaneously speeding should have a mandatory custodial sentence. But, of course, it never will. Too difficult to prove, so don't bother.

And on and on it goes: "you're being used as a source of easy money by the government and could be robbed of your means of transport," whines the defendant.


It wasn't your fault. Just the poor sap going too fast who happened to get caught. So unfair.

• But with insider information you can cheat! It actually suggests fighting back! That to me sounds like encouraging (inciting) you to break the law legally. Perverse? Absolutely.

It's all about how to cheat or beat the system after you've broken the law. It's not about encouraging a better attitude towards driving.

And it's not about making money. Heck! What a cynical suggestion.

Avoiding a crippling fine DOES NOT mention simply keeping your speed down. Just how to avoid the fine...

afterwards

What a load of 'round objects'. And if you fall for it? You're obviously such a bright spark you should quickly amass enough points to 'lose' your license. And get you off the road.

Before anyone is killed, of course.

• Manslaughter
• Murder