Jump to content

Discuss...


HaydnH

Recommended Posts

I f*cking hate what the IAM have become. They should be there for the keen motorist, for people just like us, but instead they trot out sh*t like this:

 

"At speeds of 140mph, an individual is travelling at nearly two-and-a-half miles a minute. At that speed, it is simply impossible to react to anything that might happen in front of you."

 

B*llocks mate. People in Germany seem to be able to do it without dying every single time. Yes, of course context is everything, but speed is NOT inherently dangerous. To conclude it is is something that I would expect BRAKE to come out with, not the IAM.

 

 

The quicker people stop giving them money, the better off we'll be.

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

"And in Surrey a driver was caught doing 127mph on the A3 at Burntcommon."

 

This doesn't surprise me. I've seen cars doing higher than that along there. The section just before burntcommon towards london is the worst, they have LED cats eyes which mean you can drive in the dark with no lights on as the lanes are easy to see. I've been overtaken by cars I didn't even see coming at huge speeds before.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Whoa....the one caught doing 128mph was in a 30mph limit. That's serious bad boy stuff!

 

"At speeds of 140mph, an individual is travelling at nearly two-and-a-half miles a minute. At that speed, it is simply impossible to react to anything that might happen in front of you."

 

I've seen people driving at 20mph that find it impossible to react to anything in front of them.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

"Defence lawyer Graham Walker said: "The speed of 166mph leaves most of us speechless" - clearly he`s not a biker then! :lol:

 

Judge: Anything from the defence?

Defence laywer: ...

Judge: Anything?

Defence laywer: ...

Defendant: I'm paying you to defend me!!!

Defence laywer: ...

Judge: Jail!

2 days later:

Defence laywer: 166mph... speechless...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Must be awesome to be a lawyer for a case like that, you get paid the same no matter what as the result is clear before you step foot into the court :lol:

 

edit: AND that was the speed he was CAUGHT at! Imagine what he was doing before he shoved the anchors on seeing mr plod :lol:

Edited by AliveBoy
Link to comment
Share on other sites

No, I think you're right: We should lift limits for NSL zones. It works on the IoM very well, it just means that they enforce the 30 zones VERY strictly which is the right way to do it.

 

Or even better, just remove limits altogether and work on the basis that, if caught, you have to prove that the speed you were doing was safe.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The thing is, they were right about the stopping distances having decreased, but they didn't take into account the time it takes people to a) notice a hazard 2) process what's going on and c) react to that

 

Most accidents in the UK happen at junctions, mainly because people aren't paying attention.

 

How many times do you see people bury their brakes into the floor on the motorway because they've lost concentration and got too close to the car in front? I see it a LOT on the M3 and M25. Then you see the trail of brake lights going further and further back as people react late and have to over compensate.

 

It's swings and roundabouts, in the 70's braking was worse, but there were far less distractions when driving too. The speed limits should be set to 80 IMO, just to compensate for all of the idiots on the road.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Or remove them completely, but place snipers on each gantry to "remove" anyone who's using a mobile whilst driving.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

place snipers on each gantry to "remove" anyone who's using a mobile whilst driving.

Nice idea B)

Have always wanted to have light messaging installed on my car so I can flash words of wisdom at annoying & dangerous drivers, and hidden police lights that I can switch on suddenly to scare the pants off them........that and machine guns to target those not worth saving :)

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The thing is, they were right about the stopping distances having decreased, but they didn't take into account the time it takes people to a) notice a hazard 2) process what's going on and c) react to that

 

Most accidents in the UK happen at junctions, mainly because people aren't paying attention.

 

How many times do you see people bury their brakes into the floor on the motorway because they've lost concentration and got too close to the car in front? I see it a LOT on the M3 and M25. Then you see the trail of brake lights going further and further back as people react late and have to over compensate.

 

It's swings and roundabouts, in the 70's braking was worse, but there were far less distractions when driving too. The speed limits should be set to 80 IMO, just to compensate for all of the idiots on the road.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Or remove them completely, but place snipers on each gantry to "remove" anyone who's using a mobile whilst driving.

The thing is, they were right about the stopping distances having decreased, but they didn't take into account the time it takes people to a) notice a hazard 2) process what's going on and c) react to that

 

From memory that BMW stopped in 60 feet from 60mph, according to the highway code its 240 feet from 60 and a extra 75ft from 70mph.

 

So that leaves someone 180 feet to react, if you havent reacted in 180 feet, your most likely asleep and or dead or so bad at driving you shouldnt be near a road or those speeds anyway ;)

 

Its nothing to do with reaction time etc, its because we still have the likes of Ford Anglias on the road that will take 240 feet to stop from 60!

 

I am probably with the majority, "speeding" has a time and a place, of course its not 60 outside a school, but on a quiet motorway, "a" road (national speed limit) doing 100mph is perfectly safe providing everyone else around you knows you might be doing those speeds (autobahn).

 

I have never been keen on the whole, tar everyone with the same brush attitude, i.e because a % of drivers are incompetent we make allowances for them.

 

How about staggered speed limits, so rush hour its 70 or less, whatever the traffic dictates (cctv), but say 9pm/10pm (or later) to 6am providing the conditions are good, not throwing it down/fog/mist/snow etc the speed limit is 100 for example. The motorists know other vehicles might be travelling at those speeds and i think you would probably find roads less congested as some motorists would choose to make their journeys at night (if possible) etc

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Must be awesome to be a lawyer for a case like that, you get paid the same no matter what as the result is clear before you step foot into the court :lol:

 

True story this ...... the fastest car ever caught on a speed measuring device by the police was a Veyron - IIRC it was a 3am blast on an empty motorway and the rumour was that the police had him on film doing 220mph or something equally ridiculous.

 

Rather than get him for speeding they took him to court for Dangerous Driving. Being a Veyron driver the chap wasnt short of a bob or two so got Nick Freeman to represent him, who successfully argued that 220mph on an empty motorway at 3am in a Veyron was not, in fact, dangerous, and the charge was dropped.

Amusingly, as UK law doesnt allow the CPS to "reduce" the level of the crime they couldnt wind it back to speeding so the guy walked free. :lol:

 

As for speed, Ive got biker mates who regularly hit their 300 km/h limiters and Ive gone pretty close to that and past it in Germany and on track, if the conditions and the car are right its no more dangerous than doing the speed limit in heavy traffic IMO.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

True story this ...... the fastest car ever caught on a speed measuring device by the police was a Veyron - IIRC it was a 3am blast on an empty motorway and the rumour was that the police had him on film doing 220mph or something equally ridiculous.

 

Rather than get him for speeding they took him to court for Dangerous Driving. Being a Veyron driver the chap wasnt short of a bob or two so got Nick Freeman to represent him, who successfully argued that 220mph on an empty motorway at 3am in a Veyron was not, in fact, dangerous, and the charge was dropped.

Amusingly, as UK law doesnt allow the CPS to "reduce" the level of the crime they couldnt wind it back to speeding so the guy walked free. :lol:

 

As for speed, Ive got biker mates who regularly hit their 300 km/h limiters and Ive gone pretty close to that and past it in Germany and on track, if the conditions and the car are right its no more dangerous than doing the speed limit in heavy traffic IMO.

 

Is it the prosecution that decide if it's speeding/dangerous driving or the police on the scene?

Edited by HaydnH
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...