Speed Awareness Course

[Vorpal]

For those who are interested, Ipsos Mori did a study that showed positive outcome from the Speed Awareness Courses.

BTW, the study also indicates the information comes from the DVLA database.

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.u ... uation.pdf

[kwackers]

For those who are interested, Ipsos Mori did a study that showed positive outcome from the Speed Awareness Courses.

BTW, the study also indicates the information comes from the DVLA database.

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.u ... uation.pdf

The problem as always isn't the average person - they'll probably respond fairly well to a speed awareness course.

It's the top 10% of people who are aggressively anti-authority, "don't tell me what to do in my own car", "I know better than you" etc.
(But then as cyclists we already knew that)

[mjr]

It's the top 10% of people who are aggressively anti-authority, "don't tell me what to do in my own car", "I know better than you" etc.
(But then as cyclists we already knew that)

What about the ones who brag on twitter about the speed they were doing?

[kwackers]

It's the top 10% of people who are aggressively anti-authority, "don't tell me what to do in my own car", "I know better than you" etc.
(But then as cyclists we already knew that)

What about the ones who brag on twitter about the speed they were doing?

It's the same group isn't it?

[Bonefishblues]

It's the top 10% of people who are aggressively anti-authority, "don't tell me what to do in my own car", "I know better than you" etc.
(But then as cyclists we already knew that)

What about the ones who brag on twitter about the speed they were doing?

It's the same group isn't it?

That's be the bottom 10%

[Oldjohnw]

I did one of these about 10 years ago. A man was sent home because he failed his eyesight test. He had to get a taxi because he was no longer allowed to drive. He would have to pay the fine and get the points and further charges were added.

What was he driving when he got nicked?

An HGV.

[Cugel]

in the hope that your inattention or incompetence can be excused because you were "unlucky"

This bit is entirely in your mind. This habit of yours of making up other peoples thoughts is very irritating.

You said, amongst the other items on your list:

"Some drivers obey the law to the best of their ability and get unlucky"

In other words, for a variety of reasons some drivers fail to obey the law by speeding and write that off as "being unlucky".

If a driver is caught speeding they will certainly be unlucky if that's the only time they have been speeding in years of driving but were caught. The much more likely probability is that they habitually speed but on this occasion they happened to do so when detection was possible.

I hear all sorts of excuses all the time from drivers who perform all sorts of dangerous acts, including speeding. They generally boil down to, "I am a better judge than the law". They then add, "Nothing untoward happened when I broke the law so it must be OK to do so". They have the strange logic that because they are they, the law doesn't apply: they are "special". So even if it does apply to them "technically", it shouldn't. On top of that, they believe that what didn't happen today can't happen tomorrow in similar circumstances.

But basically all of that is reasons-after-the-fact. What happens in reality is that they drive without due care and attention or in a dangerous manner because they want to and don't care about the possible consequences for the potential victims.

I'd make all you "unlucky" miscreants work in the places that have to deal with traffic "accidents", for at least one year, until you "get it".

Cugel

[NATURAL ANKLING]

Hi,
Something like..I always say don't add more than 5mph over the top. eg 33 = 10% =33 +2 = 35.

"The Association of Chief Police Officers (ACPO) issued revised speed enforcement policy guidance in 2013. It suggests that enforcement will normally occur when a driver exceeds the speed limit by a particular margin. The particular margin is normally 10 per cent over the speed limit plus 2 mph."

[Mick F]

I was driving west on the A30 today, and later east, there and back to St Wenn.
I had "Thomas" - our TomTom - stuck to the front window to help me navigate and give me an ETA. Rarely use Thomas, but he's there available to stick to the window if required.

I set the cruise control to 70mph as indicated on the speedo. Thomas said I was doing 64mph so I increased the cruise control upwards in stages to get Thomas saying 70mph. By that time, the speedo was reading 76mph.

+10% plus 2mph as per Thomas would be 79mph.
The speedo would probably be reading 85mph?

[al_yrpal]

My last speeding fine was 1972, I often speed on motorways but not on urban or country roads. Since 72 I have never been caught for anything.

The speedo inaccuracy doesnt surprise me. They fit lots of modern cars with different size tyres and I think thats why many models have overoptimistic or underoptimistic speedos.

Al

[Mick F]

The speedo inaccuracy doesnt surprise me. They fit lots of modern cars with different size tyres and I think thats why many models have overoptimistic or underoptimistic speedos.

So how do they get the odometer correct?

Checked this car, and the last, and the one before that, and the miles recorded are spot on with GPS miles. Amazing, but true.

[kwackers]

The speedo inaccuracy doesnt surprise me. They fit lots of modern cars with different size tyres and I think thats why many models have overoptimistic or underoptimistic speedos.

So how do they get the odometer correct?

Checked this car, and the last, and the one before that, and the miles recorded are spot on with GPS miles. Amazing, but true.

Some cars are better than others.

A cars speedo isn't allowed to underestimate speed but they can overestimate.
Given that if you're making a speedo its best to make it a bit optimistic unless you're happy your production/calibration is up to scratch.

I worked out once that unless you make a change to the profile (and most people reduce that anyway) then tyres only make one or two percent difference.

I once had a car that under read by about 10%, but I'd swapped the diff and the new one had 'taller' gearing...

[meic]

Two million drivers are caught speeding per year.
I havent had a ticket since the 1980s but it could happen to me tomorrow if I was driving somewhere new or they changed the limit on a regular route.
Some drivers get a ticket because they are always speeding.
Some drivers obey the law to the best of their ability and get unlucky
Some drivers obey the law to the best of their ability and stay lucky.
The only ones immune from getting a ticket are those who dont drive.

I feel that's being a speeding apologist. The only good excuse which comes to mind is if it's a non-default limit (such as 40 or 20 on a single carriageway, or 30 on an unlit one), the road looked safe to travel more quickly and some limit signs were missing or obscured - but in those cases, the ticket should be rescinded anyway. Otherwise, take the punishment and don't try to suggest that it's socially acceptable because everyone does it - they don't, as you can see from how few get tickets.

If you know that you are at risk of speeding, then why haven't you taken steps to reduce it? I realised that the speedo in my latest car is badly-designed and difficult to read fast enough for modern roads, so I added a head-up display that projects the speed translucently low onto the road ahead and assists me in obeying the law. It was a bonus that I could switch it to km/h for easier legal driving abroad.

I havent had a ticket (or any other speeding related contact with the Police) for three decades, even though I spent quite a lot of those decades as a delivery driver and dispatch rider.
So I clearly have taken very effective steps to avoid the risk of speeding, it is absolutely stupid to imply that I havent.
Just as your feeling that acknowledging that any driver can have made a mistake and committed speeding is in some way apologising for it, it is merely stating a fact.
I havent made a mistake and been caught, I am certainly not apologising for the speeding convictions which I havent had when I point out that others who endeavour to drive with as much good intent as I do may still have ended up getting a ticket because they were unlucky enough to have missed something, despite their efforts.
Any body who claims they are not equally fallible as such a person who got caught, or me who hasnt been caught (but admits it is a possibility) is talking rubbish.

Otherwise, take the punishment and don't try to suggest that it's socially acceptable because everyone does it

Well here is more garbage, what punishment? I havent even been accused by anybody who knows anything only by some forum poster making stuff up for no valid reason.
No way was I claiming it was socially acceptable to speed because everybody does it, I was merely claiming that one speeding ticket doesnt prove that somebody is always doing it.

they don't, as you can see from how few get tickets.

Yes, I AM one of those who doesnt get tickets. It will probably remain that way because I dont go around speeding but you never know, it is human to err.

[meic]

in the hope that your inattention or incompetence can be excused because you were "unlucky"

This bit is entirely in your mind. This habit of yours of making up other peoples thoughts is very irritating.

You said, amongst the other items on your list:

"Some drivers obey the law to the best of their ability and get unlucky"

In other words, for a variety of reasons some drivers fail to obey the law by speeding and write that off as "being unlucky".

If a driver is caught speeding they will certainly be unlucky if that's the only time they have been speeding in years of driving but were caught. The much more likely probability is that they habitually speed but on this occasion they happened to do so when detection was possible.

I hear all sorts of excuses all the time from drivers who perform all sorts of dangerous acts, including speeding. They generally boil down to, "I am a better judge than the law". They then add, "Nothing untoward happened when I broke the law so it must be OK to do so". They have the strange logic that because they are they, the law doesn't apply: they are "special". So even if it does apply to them "technically", it shouldn't. On top of that, they believe that what didn't happen today can't happen tomorrow in similar circumstances.

But basically all of that is reasons-after-the-fact. What happens in reality is that they drive without due care and attention or in a dangerous manner because they want to and don't care about the possible consequences for the potential victims.

I'd make all you "unlucky" miscreants work in the places that have to deal with traffic "accidents", for at least one year, until you "get it".

Cugel

When you say "in other words" what you are saying is actually something quite different to what I said.
In the real words from my mouth what I am actually saying is that "ALL drivers speed at some point and the unlucky ones get caught when they do it."
Any driver who puts in any reasonable distance on unfamiliar roads will have broken the speed limit at some point just because we are mere imperfect human beings who can not get everything right all the time. Anybody who claims they are beyond reproach in that respect is showing the arrogance of illusory superiority and not admitting that they were lucky enough that nobody was watching when they did make a mistake (probably not even them themselves!).

[Paulatic]

AFAC2198-17A8-406C-AEC7-7497276A183B.jpeg
Nothing surprises me about this guy.

Should he have tried to keep it secret?

Well he is now
That tweet has been deleted. I can’t imagine why