Speed Limits

Speed Cameras Become Counter-Productive
Speed Limit Increases

The attitude that no speed camera means no speed restriction has surpassed the lethal. Clearly, a conventional sign means nothing to many.

• If there is no sign to indicate speed then this means 30mph. If there is a limit of 40mph or 50mph then such speed will be explicitly displayed. A declassified stretch of road will be either 60mph if single carriageway or 70mph if a dual carriageway or motorway. No sign defaults to 30mph. The MAXIMUM speed on British roads is 70mph. Simple.

But...

...be aware that dual carriageways can be reduced to 50mph for no apparent reason.  Passing the end of the carriageway MUST be at or less than the indicated speed. The police are totally inflexible regarding ANY circumstance.
   The reckless speed merchant who (that, surely - DA) travels a constant and sustained speed above the limit should be different to someone obviously slowing from a legal limit (clear and unobstructed 50mph dual carriageway) just after the sign (40mph). Apparently NOT. The excess speed was 7mph (ie 47mph) a few seconds after the sign. Clearly the speed was too much in the still (ie not moving - DA) photographic capture. A 'speeder' at that moment. Although clearly signposted, the mobile unit was not noticeable. There are no yellow speed cameras.
   The positioning of this 'hidden' mobile unit constitutes deliberately 'catching' the 'speeder'. It seems unfair, but right and proper. Quite acceptable behaviour. It is the intransigence that is the most objectionable. Ignoring completely any explanation. Just to state that the 'speeding' Notice of Intended  Prosecution (NIP) is valid would make this more acceptable.
   The (only - DA) conclusion is that revenue is simply collected and any reasonable explanation is just officially ignored.
   Even though potentially hazardous, it is essential to ensure speed is reduced (maybe quickly and without warning) before the oncoming speed sign.

Confidence and future support for the police have been compromised (severely eroded - DA). Cameras are clearly placed to make money and NOT improve road safety. Stretches of road that should have cameras do not have them. Opinion has been reversed. This is in any article argued here that may be related to SPEED.

And it is highly cynical to claim that a fine can be avoided by attending (at your own expense - DA) a Speed Awareness Course (SAC). There is a charge made that it just under the fine amount - excluding any other expenses incurred. An insurer could ask if there have been any convictions within recent years. The acceptance of any NIP is a direct admission of guilt with ANY circumstance just ignored. UNLESS this is heard in court. You will lose and so be sentenced (fine + points + court/solicitor/barrister costs - DA). A true 'rock and hard place' (a Catch 22 - DA).

Some drivers are possibly deluded by believing that since the car can go faster they are allowed to drive faster. Or probably just don't care. No camera and the chances of being caught are very, very low. The attitude of the gambler playing the odds. It has nothing to do with personal responsibility or self-control, but simply what can be got away with.

• A car capable of high speed (not the driver - DA) is never sold with the brain that ought to go with it. But like many things in life, people often live outside the limits of their ability (and finances - DA). Try swimming in water at depth by holding a single breath. A trained free-diver will know their limit or death will quickly follow. An untrained diver would drown. Experience can be critical.

If there is no camera then it seems to be a case of:

'my time is more important that yours and
speed restrictions don't apply to me.

I will do as I please and sod everybody else'

Local knowledge also enables sudden (dangerous - DA) slowing or last minute identification of a bright-yellow camera (if not highly visible this can bizarrely be interpreted as entrapment - DA). Pathetic. And the law allows it. Even more pathetic. The rights of the 'speeder' appear to exceed those of the safe driver (staying legal seems perversely to be regarded as the attitude of a 'loser' - DA).

Those who drive fast may believe they can do as they please (they are the 'good drivers'), but such 'good drivers' have NO AWARENESS OR CONCERN for the hazards around them. The attitude of the moron. They also believe that they can stop quickly enough. Complete delusion. Also it makes no allowance for the fact that not everyone can react as quickly. Someone driving within their own limitations and at the limit of speed or slower.

• A large and heavy car driven at speed will take longer to stop even if reaction speed is fast (it can never be fast enough - DA).

Of those who ride powerful motorcycles, many (probably the majority by far - DA) seem to imagine themselves excluded from laws that apply to everyone else. As an estimate of all RTA (road traffic accident), bikers amount to just 1% of road users, but account for 25% of those killed. A speed limit declares the maximum speed permissible and not necessarily the safe speed that depends on the conditions at the time. An experienced driver does not even need to consider the argument. Experience is unconscious. The inexperienced driver has no such knowledge. Or conscience.