Loud Pipes Save Lives... Really?

[Mjolinor]

I just tend to use the evidence that my person experiences and draw the conclusions from that.

I do not need to read about it, I have personal experience of what it is and what it does and my conclusions are valid from what i have seen, not what I have read or what other people said.

The day I start believing things on the Internet or indeed anything other people hypothesize about with no proof is the day to order my wooden box.

[andys]

Despite your obviously very passionate belief, the government, the police, the courts... whatever don't make money by enforcing laws. The figures are available if you care to look. The administration of the law is a ferociously expensive business.

..

Maybe not but the moneys going somewhere isn't it.

[windmill john]

Rob, I totally understand the reasoning behind the proactive approach, it’s certainly easier.
I just think 20 mph (for a competent driver) is far too slow for a road; bear in mind a sprinter can run faster then that.
hitting someone at 20 hurts less.

Yes of course hitting someone at 20mph hurts less and all related comments.
Yes of course people have more time to react at 20mph.
Yes of course It helps the non thinking, distracted, not paying attention pedestrian.

My one feeling.... take ownership; that’s the pedestrians by the way.

By the way, I’m not advocating 60mph either!

[Mjolinor]

One is not allowed to take ownership any more. Always now someone else is to blame and the removal of common sense from the legal process has left us in this situation.

I can see no way back without Armageddon.

[Rob Frankhamr]

I just tend to use the evidence that my person experiences and draw the conclusions from that.

I do not need to read about it, I have personal experience of what it is and what it does and my conclusions are valid from what i have seen, not what I have read or what other people said.

The day I start believing things on the Internet or indeed anything other people hypothesize about with no proof is the day to order my wooden box.

No comment...

Rob

[Rob Frankhamr]

Despite your obviously very passionate belief, the government, the police, the courts... whatever don't make money by enforcing laws. The figures are available if you care to look. The administration of the law is a ferociously expensive business.

..

Maybe not but the moneys going somewhere isn't it.

Of course it is, it goes to a number of places and, yes, a lot of it goes into policing and the court system... I never said or implied otherwise... but it is nowhere near enough to pay for it and make a profit which is what the 'it's all about the money' brigade continually try to put forward...

Rob

[andys]

but it is nowhere near enough to pay for it and make a profit which is what the 'it's all about the money' brigade continually try to put forward...

Rob

https://www.autoexpress.co.uk/news/3527 ... -potential

[Mjolinor]

The one overriding fact that it is for fund raising and not safety is that if you warn people that there is a speed camera then you will be done for it despite the fact that it clearly makes more people slow down.

That is just the most obvious but there are hundreds of others that prove it in addition to that one.

[Rob Frankhamr]

The fallacy in that argument is that, in order to need to slow down, the driver must be exceeding the speed limit in the first place, therefore, by warning other drivers, there is an overall tendency to encourage them to speed.

Rob

[Mjolinor]

The fallacy in that argument is that, in order to need to slow down, the driver must be exceeding the speed limit in the first place, therefore, by warning other drivers, there is an overall tendency to encourage them to speed.

Rob

OK, So it is safer for them to continue speeding and fine one in every 30 that do speed, real sensible that.

Personally I would have thought that slowing all the drivers down to the speed limit is more sensible than slowing the one that is chosen to donate but what do I know, I only have the facts.

.

[andys]

The one overriding fact that it is for fund raising and not safety is that if you warn people that there is a speed camera then you will be done for it despite the fact that it clearly makes more people slow down.

That is just the most obvious but there are hundreds of others that prove it in addition to that one.

Of course.
The fact is that fines aren't really necessary anyway.
Most people aren't going to flinch at a fixed penalty of £100 and are going to find the threat of points or a ban much more of a deterrent.
When I realised I'd gone too fast approaching a mobile speed camera *** a few years back on the bike I wasn't in the slightest bit concerned about the financial impact but had sleepless nights worrying how many points I was going to get if they got me.
Fines as far as I'm concerned are about someone somewhere making some handy money rather than a deterrent, just as local authorities do with parking fines.

***
I did get caught so found out through this incident that mobile speed camera partnership vans can get you going away from them as well as approaching. You're not going to dodge it just because you don't have a front number plate

[King Herald]

I did get caught so found out through this incident that mobile speed camera partnership vans can get you going away from them as well as approaching. You're not going to dodge it just because you don't have a front number plate

Even approaching from the front the guy will scoot round and look out through his windscreen to get your number as you pass by.

As I found on my one and only ever speeding conviction. I asked how they knew it was me, with only a frontal photograph, and they told me.

Totally my own fault, I thought I was in a 40 zone, but it was 30, after about 5 speed limit changes in two miles. A few hours at a ‘speed awareness’ class and I was free.

[Rob Frankhamr]

The one overriding fact that it is for fund raising and not safety is that if you warn people that there is a speed camera then you will be done for it despite the fact that it clearly makes more people slow down.

That is just the most obvious but there are hundreds of others that prove it in addition to that one.

Of course.
The fact is that fines aren't really necessary anyway.
Most people aren't going to flinch at a fixed penalty of £100 and are going to find the threat of points or a ban much more of a deterrent.
When I realised I'd gone too fast approaching a mobile speed camera *** a few years back on the bike I wasn't in the slightest bit concerned about the financial impact but had sleepless nights worrying how many points I was going to get if they got me.
Fines as far as I'm concerned are about someone somewhere making some handy money rather than a deterrent, just as local authorities do with parking fines.

***
I did get caught so found out through this incident that mobile speed camera partnership vans can get you going away from them as well as approaching. You're not going to dodge it just because you don't have a front number plate

And, of course, the dastardly authorities are too stupid to carry out studies and analyses to discover what level of penalty is most effective, taking into account the general accepatbility of the penalty by the general public when the penalty is considered in proportion to the offence, the effect on other sectors of the community & etc. & etc. I really wonder why we continue to elect politicians and employ police forces at all...



Rob

[Mjolinor]

I did get caught so found out through this incident that mobile speed camera partnership vans can get you going away from them as well as approaching. You're not going to dodge it just because you don't have a front number plate

Even approaching from the front the guy will scoot round and look out through his windscreen to get your number as you pass by.

As I found on my one and only ever speeding conviction. I asked how they knew it was me, with only a frontal photograph, and they told me.

Totally my own fault, I thought I was in a 40 zone, but it was 30, after about 5 speed limit changes in two miles. A few hours at a ‘speed awareness’ class and I was free.

There is a fund raising stretch of road like that as you approach Liverpool airport. Clearly the deciding factors are that a lot on not too familiar people use the road so if they change the speed limit every 200 yards and it seems, every few months, so they can raise a lot using those particular safety features (all in the name of safety as you drive through an industrial area with absolutely no pedestrians or hazards of any sort).

[andys]

And, of course, the dastardly authorities are too stupid to carry out studies and analyses to discover what level of penalty is most effective, taking into account the general accepatbility of the penalty by the general public when the penalty is considered in proportion to the offence, the effect on other sectors of the community & etc. & etc. I really wonder why we continue to elect politicians and employ police forces at all...



Rob

To be clear I do not think of the authories as dastardly but conversley I do no see them as the infallible outpost of honesty and integrity that you clearly do.
I've provided a link to a study recently carried out and as usual you stick your fingers in your ears when presented with evidence you don't want to hear.
That's scary from someone who claims to have been a police officer.
You single handedly highlight one of the reasons I'm distrustful of the police.

[Rob Frankhamr]

And, of course, the dastardly authorities are too stupid to carry out studies and analyses to discover what level of penalty is most effective, taking into account the general accepatbility of the penalty by the general public when the penalty is considered in proportion to the offence, the effect on other sectors of the community & etc. & etc. I really wonder why we continue to elect politicians and employ police forces at all...



Rob

To be clear I do not think of the authories as dastardly but conversley I do no see them as the infallible outpost of honesty and integrity that you clearly do.
I've provided a link to a study recently carried out and as usual you stick your fingers in your ears when presented with evidence you don't want to hear.
That's scary from someone who claims to have been a police officer.
You single handedly highlight one of the reasons I'm distrustful of the police.

If you can't carry out a reasoned argument without resorting to personal insults, then I think it is time to close the conversation.

Rob