Speed freaks
Saturday, November 22, 2008 The government is proposing to award six penalty points to anyone caught driving at more than 20mph above the speed limit. Two convictions for this offence would result in an automatic driving ban. That's fine if you are reckless enough to drive at 50mph in a 30pmh speed zone, but outrageous if you are driving at 90mph on the motorway in clear conditions with a low level of traffic.
I agree with much of what was written HERE in yesterday's Daily Telegraph, including the proposal for variable speed limits on motorways. I also support the idea of a new top limit on motorways - after all, I've been banging on about this for years.
What I don't like is the Telegraph's suggestion that the new limit (the paper suggests 80mph) should be "rigorously enforced with the use of 'average speed' cameras". Average speed cameras have their place, but the idea that they will be used to "rigorously" enforce an 80mph limit on Britain's motorways is preposterous.
I drive 25-30,000 miles a year, up and down the country. My present car has a top speed of 146mph. Sadly, unless I take it on a German autobahn, I will never experience anything like that. It also has cruise control which I often use to regulate my speed on roads where there are 'average speed' cameras. However, travelling mile after mile at 70 (or even 80mph) on a motorway is so boring the biggest danger is falling asleep. At the very least, it encourages the driver's mind to wander and think of things other than the road ahead.
If we are to have variable speed limits they should include the flexibility to drive considerably faster on motorways in certain conditions and at certain times of day or night. Speed limits should be based on road and weather conditions - and the condition of your car. There are lots of factors when it comes to dangerous or reckless driving, and speed is only one of them.
The rigorous enforcement of an 80mph speed limit on Britain's motorways would make many people's lives less enjoyable. (It would certainly reduce my quality of life.) I have been driving for 31 years and I have yet to pick up any penalty points although (like most people) I often exceed the speed limit on motorways. I judge the situation and the conditions and I drive accordingly. It's called decision-making.
Let's not confuse speed with recklessness - and let's have no more talk of "rigorous enforcement" of the speed limit on Britain's motorways. The police - and the courts - have more important things to do with their time.
Reader Comments (6)
It comes back down to the same old solution again - we're the easy target for gathering and collecting revenue in the handiest way possible. Stick up any ol camera on any road and the rest takes care of itself, a nice little earner and there's so many of us to collect from.
Dont bother mentioning the statistics that because of the dangerous conditions of a lot of roads, drug taking that doesnt show up on tests, motorways with not enough rest facilities, are the cause of the highest percentage of accidents, because they dont gather revenue and are far too time consuming and costly to bother about.
I've begun to think in recent years that this government would really like to ban driving in much the same way as they have banned smoking.
And I've begun to see all the officious signs on Britain's roads as being no different from "No Smoking" signs.
The appearance of pedestrian areas in inner cities reminds me of the gradual appearance of No Smoking areas in public places over several decades. These things creep up on you, and you don't notice, and suddenly something you took for granted is gone.
The future would seem to be a world in which there are forests of signs everywhere, instructing and warning about everything and anything. Who knows? Perhaps soon table knives will come with the instruction; "To be held in the right hand"?
What seems to be increasingly impermissible ("unacceptable" is their favourite word) to these martinets is to let anyone do anything in their own chosen way. In more and more areas of life, from smoking and drinking to eating and driving, there seem to be committees of self-styled experts who make it their business to tell everybody else how to live their lives in the most exact detail.
Perhaps that was what "Education. Education, Education" was all about? Instruction Instruction. Instruction.
You couldnt have said a truer word idlex. Thats exactly how its going. Who needs Hitler!
Welcome to Babel.
The old adage that we are becoming slaves to technology rather than masters is no truer when applied to speeding and, in particular, "average speeding" technology. This government is hell-bent on using technology to enforce compliance with the law. In the meantime, we again hand to the politicians the means to track our movements 24/7. "No it would never happen in Britain I hear you say". Well think on, this New Labour government is certainly not benign and in most of its legislation is boarding on a fascist mentality. And Simon, I make no apology for the use of the term fascist - it exactly sums up their mentality.
Since 1965 when the speed limit of 70 mph was introduced, technology in cars has moved on a pace and in the most conditions it is more than safe to drive at 80 mph. The question is, however, will New Labour actually give the people the benefit of this safer car technology and raise the upper limit. Not a chance, they only see technology utilisation as a means of controlling the masses.
I've been saying only half-jokingly that this Government's next transport policy will be to resolve congestion by criminalising or pricing drivers off the road. Criminalisation offers the opportunity for HMG to be more driver-friendly - it's YOUR fault if you lose your licence for driving too fast and, therefore, dangerously/recklessly and, inevitably, the punishment will also involve a fine which, inevitably, will not be used to improve the transport system but on one of NuLabour's pet projects - free cinema tickets, perhaps, to see the new Government-approved film about a chain-smoker's conversion and rise through the echelons of ASH to find fulfillment in devoting his life to preaching the word?
The criminalisation process will be speeded up if they go ahead with their proposals to lower the limit of alcohol in the bloodstream - so don't even think of going down the pub after a hard day's work, you might be tempted to have more than one unit of alcohol (soon to be measured as a quarter of a pint and a thimbleful of spirits). Meanwhile, prepare for the dodgy stats to build the case and to measure the (inevitable) success of the new measures (or do they not bother with the stats anymore?)
Work longer hours to keep up with those taxes, have a light, healthy supper (mustn't upset the digestion and jeopardise a good night's sleep) and get off to bed so that you don't destroy the planet by using energy. While you're there, dutifully reproduce - HMG needs the taxpayers of the future.
When does the revolution start, please?
Ok, maybe I am flogging a dead horse as I believe I have said this before here, but the only way I can see that this government can approve it's actions against motorists on the basis that 3000 (Actual figure being less, around 2,740) die on our roads each year (one presumes that that means a 12 month period) is that the majority of these deaths are tax payers. Whereas, they are not in the least bit concerned about the 24,000 elderly people who die from the cold each winter (one presumes this to be a 3 to 4 month period) as most of these deaths are people who draw a state pension and are no longer paying anything back to the government; hence they are a burden and well rid!
Of course it is tragic that anyone should be killed on our roads, but let's get this in perspective. People die in their homes from accidents, apart from those who die of the cold; people die at work and on holiday, and as a percentage, 3,000 is really very small!
As for the actual question of speed - driving too slowly can be just as, if not more, dangerous than driving at the speed dictated by the actual road and conditions at the time!
If the governmwent want to reduce or put an end to all deaths on the road, then they need to make the roads such that they dictate the speed at which we should drive; this, of course, will not bring them any revenue though!