Major contribuition to road safety and reducing aggressive driving.

[Padders 2,850]

3 minutes ago, WiseOwl182 said:

I'm totally against this. The technology just isn't ready and it's highly intrusive. Furthermore it takes away any discretion (e.g. a clear motorway in good conditions) which of cause all posters here would not partake in, but a large proportion of motorists in the real world safely do.

Not me what says it, motoring organisations ETC. all say it SPEED KILLS.  a clear motorway in good conditions, lulls you into a false sense of security, the worse the conditions the less accidents, people drive accordingly.

[WiseOwl182 10]

5 minutes ago, Padders said:

Not me what says it, motoring organisations ETC. all say it SPEED KILLS.  a clear motorway in good conditions, lulls you into a false sense of security, the worse the conditions the less accidents, people drive accordingly.

70mph on a clear motorway is painfully slow. Most people will drift up to 75 and barely notice it. Similarly, several roads around Sheffield have artificially low limits, as I've mentioned on other threads. Before this new EU enforced rule comes in (not that the EU enforced laws on us, of course) we need some serious reviews of speed limits on certain roads.

[Padders 2,850]

14 minutes ago, WiseOwl182 said:

70mph on a clear motorway is painfully slow. Most people will drift up to 75 and barely notice it. Similarly, several roads around Sheffield have artificially low limits, as I've mentioned on other threads. Before this new EU enforced rule comes in (not that the EU enforced laws on us, of course) we need some serious reviews of speed limits on certain roads.

Driving round my estate (shiregreen) its a mandatary 20mph, drives me mad, but its been introduced to save lives, so how can I argue with that. plenty will of course.

[WiseOwl182 10]

11 minutes ago, Padders said:

Driving round my estate (shiregreen) its a mandatary 20mph, drives me mad, but its been introduced to save lives, so how can I argue with that. plenty will of course.

Reducing it to 5mph and motorways to 20mph would save even more lives. How can anyone argue with that?

[RollingJ 2,002]

21 minutes ago, WiseOwl182 said:

Reducing it to 5mph and motorways to 20mph would save even more lives. How can anyone argue with that?

Even better idea - lets go back to the man with a red flag in front of every vehicle on the road - and bring the world to a standstill.

[Padders 2,850]

3 minutes ago, RollingJ said:

Even better idea - lets go back to the man with a red flag in front of every vehicle on the road - and bring the world to a standstill.

.

[Justin Smith 10]

13 hours ago, woodview said:

I agree in making roads as safe as possible and cracking down on dangerous driving.

But a gps enabled vehicle vould also automatically issue you speeding fines, quite simply. So the safety principle is great, I agree totally, but I struggle to differentiate that and snooping, dna storage etc etc that have all been hotly disputed.

I don`t think anyone is suggesting that the system would not prevent you speeding but only prosecute you for doing so. Is that what you seem to be thinking ?

[RollingJ 2,002]

@Easy livin I don't drive, but even if I did, I would avoid driving through any city centre, not just Sheffield - they are all congested, and the planners attempts to alleviate the problem usually have the exact opposite result - IMHO.

[woodview 10]

3 hours ago, Justin Smith said:

I don`t think anyone is suggesting that the system would not prevent you speeding but only prosecute you for doing so. Is that what you seem to be thinking ?

What I mean is it is constant legal monitoring.

Just ploughing in to it needs discussion. That has happened with dna storage, snoopers charter etc. I see them as all on a theme. I guess speeding is your bug bear subject, so perhaps find it more acceptable?

[Justin Smith 10]

50 minutes ago, woodview said:

What I mean is it is constant legal monitoring.

Just ploughing in to it needs discussion. That has happened with dna storage, snoopers charter etc. I see them as all on a theme. I guess speeding is your bug bear subject, so perhaps find it more acceptable?

Aggressive drivers who kill innocent people are my bugbear subject. TBH I cannot understand why they aren`t everyone`s bugbear subject (excluding selfish immature [under 25 ? ] Petrolheads).

By any reasonable definition speeding is aggressive driving.

Edited March 29, 2019 by Justin Smith

[iansheff 86]

I wonder what tax the Government will dream up to make up for all the lost revenue created by speeding fines.

[geared 303]

1 hour ago, Justin Smith said:

Aggressive drivers who kill innocent people are my bugbear subject. TBH I cannot understand why they aren`t everyone`s bugbear subject (excluding selfish immature [under 25 ? ] Petrolheads).

By any reasonable definition speeding is aggressive driving.

To be fair in the last two weeks I've narrowly avoided being crashing into twice, both times it was down to lack of driver attention.

This morning I saw a BMW on the M1, weaving around and not able to stay in it's lane - driver was busy looking down at their phone.