THINK I've just been caught speeding on motorway

[willman 10]

72 doesn't lead to a fine, neither does 75 or indeed 79, since the rule is 10%+2 above the limit.

 

---------- Post added 15-03-2017 at 08:25 ----------

 

 

Can I book a session on a skid pan? That'd be great fun.

 

No it isn't.

 

If a police officer chooses to fine you for being 5% over the speed limit that is their prerogative.

People should not be coerced or confused into thinking that they are safe when they aren't.

 

On checking .gov figures for accidents where speeding was contributory it uses the speed limit set by law as the default, so a crash at 33 would count speeding as contributory whereas the "rule" wouldn't class that as speeding - would it?

Edited March 15, 2017 by willman

[silentP 10]

No it isn't.

 

As a newbie even I know he'll need you to substantiate that

[sgtkate 10]

As a newbie even I know he'll need you to substantiate that

 

LOL! We are typecast already!

 

I was wondering whether the comment referred to a skid pan not being fun (I can say they are immense fun!) or to the rule.

 

If the 'rule' then he's right, there isn't a rule to say speed limit + 10% + 2mph. Some police forces have that as guidance, but if you are doing 30.1mph in a 30mph zone you can get prosecuted.

[max 13]

Not sure where you get the £110m from but i'd like to hazard a guess its a lot more, the awreness course I went to had 5 classes running concurrently with around 20-25 in each class, 5.5 days a week at £85 a time work that one out.

 

The awareness courses are run by private companies so it's unlikely that their income is included in the £110m.

[geared 321]

Modern cars on unlimited motorways in Germany (+/- 50% of their m/w network) are involved in 73% of Germany's m/w deaths.

 

That seems like a total nonsense statistic to me, depending on your definition of modern you could actually be talking about the vast majority of cars on the road anyway.

 

It's like saying 4-wheeled cars accounted for 99% of road deaths in the UK :loopy::loopy:

[Cyclone 10]

That seems like a total nonsense statistic to me, depending on your definition of modern you could actually be talking about the vast majority of cars on the road anyway.

 

It's like saying 4-wheeled cars accounted for 99% of road deaths in the UK :loopy::loopy:

 

The word modern is irrelevant.

 

The unlimited part of Germany's motorways (approx 50%) account for 73% of the motorway deaths.

 

---------- Post added 15-03-2017 at 10:56 ----------

 

LOL! We are typecast already!

 

I was wondering whether the comment referred to a skid pan not being fun (I can say they are immense fun!) or to the rule.

 

If the 'rule' then he's right, there isn't a rule to say speed limit + 10% + 2mph. Some police forces have that as guidance, but if you are doing 30.1mph in a 30mph zone you can get prosecuted.

 

Yes, it's the ACPO guideline, not a rule. Most forces AFAIK apply the guideline.

[geared 321]

As a newbie even I know he'll need you to substantiate that

 

This.

 

A decent solicitor would get it thrown out of court.

The limit is 70, but a judge won't entertain some plod trying to do a motorist for 71mph.

[Cyclone 10]

 

On checking .gov figures for accidents where speeding was contributory it uses the speed limit set by law as the default, so a crash at 33 would count speeding as contributory whereas the "rule" wouldn't class that as speeding - would it?

 

Of course the statistics use the legal limit. I didn't suggest otherwise.

And yes, if an officer is having a bad day and checking speeds (not that the police do much speed checking these days) then they can give you a ticket.

 

---------- Post added 15-03-2017 at 10:59 ----------

 

 

Until drivers act responsibly there won't ever be any changes to speed limits.

 

There will, they'll keep getting reduced, look at the NSL limits being changed to 50 limits all over the country.

Unfortunately this just discredits the entire notion and makes it more likely that they will be ignored.

[geared 321]

The word modern is irrelevant.

 

The unlimited part of Germany's motorways (approx 50%) account for 73% of the motorway deaths.

 

A 2008 report makes the point it's not so black and white:

 

A 2008 report by the European Transport Safety Council (ETSC) found that of the 645 road deaths in Germany in 2006, 67% occurred on on motorway sections without limits and 33% on stretches with a permanent limit. The fact that 33% of German motorways have a permanent limit and 67% have either a temporary limit or none means that these figures, at first glance, show that having a speed limit does not the lower the number of fatalities on motorways. But as ETSC note: 'this similarity of percentages takes no account of traffic volumes on different sections.'

 

but also

 

Rural roads killed five times more people than motorways in Germany between 2007-9, accounting for 60% for road deaths, versus 12% for motorways.

 

Although in a 2014 press release the numbers were different

 

ETSC’s German member DVR said in response that deaths are 25% higher on stretches of Germany motorways that have no speed limit compared to those with limits

[sgtkate 10]

A 2008 report makes the point it's not so black and white:

 

 

 

but also

 

 

 

Although in a 2014 press release the numbers were different

 

Yup, the key word is deaths and not accidents. Physics dictates that higher speeds equals more energy equals more force and more damage and likely higher deaths. Are there more accidents on the autobahns than elsewhere? No it appears (assuming numbers on that website are accurate):

 

http://brandongaille.com/17-fascinating-autobahn-accident-statistics/

 

In fact that shows that you are more than twice as likely to have an accident on US roads than the autobahn. Rather than concentrating on speed on motorways (any pedestrian area needs speed limits and them to be enforced due to the different levels of concentration required to drive around a town safely, you don't need to keep an eye out for pedestrians on the motorway one would hope) lets focus on tailgating which is far more dangerous than speed. If everyone is travelling along at 100mph +/-10% the risk is no greater than at 70mph if everyone keeps sensible gaps between vehicles. Braking time is increased at 100mph compared to 70mph but that matters little if the gap is also increased to compensate. Enforce correct gaps by camera and you'll have my attention more than simply speed which is just an absolute cop-out.

[silentP 10]

This.

 

A decent solicitor would get it thrown out of court.

The limit is 70, but a judge won't entertain some plod trying to do a motorist for 71mph.

 

Thank you but I'm cool with it, it was Willman's bag not mine

 

People know the rules, if they break them there's a chance that one day they'll get caught or worse. I don't have a problem with the latter, its the game they play, the downside is that they have zero respect or thought for others.

[geared 321]

lets focus on tailgating which is far more dangerous than speed.

 

but why try and enforce tailgating when everyone is on their phone anyway??

 

Personally I see 20x more people on their phone than I do tailgating.