bishbosh Posted September 29, 2006 Share Posted September 29, 2006 If you don't speed you don't need to look out for the cameras. Speed limits are there for a reason. It may be that that reason is not immediately (or ever ) apparent, but there will be justification for it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
geoffbeaumont Posted September 29, 2006 Share Posted September 29, 2006 If you don't speed you don't need to look out for the cameras.Speed limits are there for a reason. It may be that that reason is not immediately (or ever ) aparent, but there will be justification for it. Agreed - nevertheless people do speed while using half their concentration to look for cameras, and that makes them more dangerous. Whether they are more dangerous than they would be if they weren't looking for the cameras (and potentially speeding by a greater margin) is open to debate. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dollythelw Posted September 29, 2006 Share Posted September 29, 2006 If you don't speed you don't need to look out for the cameras. only a V8 owner could say that, in the land of diesel you can afford to speed ...before the stoning starts anyone that seriously wants to portray themselves as having never exceeeded any speed limit has got to be sniffing carb cleaner on a regular basis, speed WHERE APPROPRIATE isnt necessarily a bad thing IMO, Ive never busted a 30, always crawl around housing estates/play areas and schools (not for the same reasons as some of you pervs think) - but open road (not country lanes!) are a different matter. more cops, less cameras - I know of a couple now providing sterling service as bar-b-q's... Wasnt it Magna Carta that kurbed the last Parliament in the 1600's that thought it was above the rule of Law? just about pre-dates the bill of humna rights by err 700 years... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dottythe90 Posted September 29, 2006 Share Posted September 29, 2006 Wasnt it Magna Carta that kurbed the last Parliament in the 1600's that thought it was above the rule of Law? just about pre-dates the bill of humna rights by err 700 years... Magna Carta was forced on the King in 1215 and curbed his powers, rather than Parliament (which back then didn't really exist in any form equivalent to what we would recognise today). Guy Fawkes came closest to curbing Parliaments power Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bishbosh Posted September 29, 2006 Share Posted September 29, 2006 ...before the stoning starts anyone that seriously wants to portray themselves as having never exceeeded any speed limit has got to be sniffing carb cleaner on a regular basis, speed WHERE APPROPRIATE isnt necessarily a bad thing IMO, Ive never busted a 30, always crawl around housing estates/play areas and schools (not for the same reasons as some of you pervs think) - but open road (not country lanes!) are a different matter. Couldn't agree more with that statement Jez. However, what burns my ar$e is people complaining about being caught on a speed camera. IMHO if you were caught, you were speeding, so hold your hand up and admit it. By all means campaign to change the law / position of cameras etc, but if it's there and you're caught, front up. (BTW, this is not a personal tirade against anyone, and certainly not against hobnob fetishists I just get riled by people bleating on about cameras that's all.) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tonk Posted September 29, 2006 Share Posted September 29, 2006 now they're installing SPECS at great exepense on the M27 when do they come into force? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dollythelw Posted September 29, 2006 Share Posted September 29, 2006 Dotty - Bang on but IMS later in the 17th century, just after Corks time, Parliament got cocky and the Carta was used to beat them into shape Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dottythe90 Posted September 29, 2006 Share Posted September 29, 2006 Dotty - Bang on but IMS later in the 17th century, just after Corks time, Parliament got cocky and the Carta was used to beat them into shape Shame that no seems to have the power or inclination to do it again Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest diesel_jim Posted September 29, 2006 Share Posted September 29, 2006 Agreed - nevertheless people do speed while using half their concentration to look for cameras, and that makes them more dangerous. Whether they are more dangerous than they would be if they weren't looking for the cameras (and potentially speeding by a greater margin) is open to debate. To be brutally honest, if "looking for a camera" that is 10 feet tall, usually painted yellow with a large box on it, as well as lots of road signs that tell you there are camers there, makes you lose concentration and your right foot press further down on the accelerator, then you shouldn't really be behind the wheel of a car. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
geoffbeaumont Posted October 1, 2006 Share Posted October 1, 2006 To be brutally honest, if "looking for a camera" that is 10 feet tall, usually painted yellow with a large box on it, as well as lots of road signs that tell you there are camers there, makes you lose concentration and your right foot press further down on the accelerator, then you shouldn't really be behind the wheel of a car. Fair comment. That'll be small comfort when they hit you or mow your kid down though Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GBMUD Posted October 3, 2006 Share Posted October 3, 2006 Speed limits are there for a reason. It may be that that reason is not immediately (or ever ) apparent, but there will be justification for it. True. A local councillor might live on that road and prefer slower moving cars. Or someone might have discovered that cars often go faster along that particular stretch of road as it is down/up hill - thinking about the A303... Chris Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bishbosh Posted October 4, 2006 Share Posted October 4, 2006 If you let the gradient control your speed you are not in control of the vehicle..... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GBMUD Posted October 4, 2006 Share Posted October 4, 2006 If you let the gradient control your speed you are not in control of the vehicle..... True. That makes it a "Due care and attention" issue though, not a speeding one? Yes, the driver gets caught though. I was really thinking about drivers of slower vehicles who might be inclined to speed up while approaching a hill in order to maintain a reasonable speed while going up it. That is not to condone speeding, but when is it safer to exceed the limit for a few second at the bottom of a hill in order to be doing a reasonable (and safer) speed by the top if it? A lot of the cameras on the A303 seem to be located in such a way as to generate revenue, not to reduce accidents. Chris Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.