A tougher line on speeding?

[[XAP]Bob]

Actually, if we are thinking ahead to a not-too-distant future when motor vehicles are physically unable to speed, speed limits should be constantly varying as the conditions vary. We will be able to do away with the nonsense of 30mph transitioning to 60mph with nothing in between. The limit could go from 30 to 31,32... And it could vary according to the time of day, the weather and any other variable. As a driver you could keep your foot down and just accept you are not going to go any faster than allowed, and do your bit by keeping an eye open for hazards. Speed cameras would be unnecessary, as would all traffic calming.

But we're not thinking ahead about a future world,but debating whether some stuffed shift Tory minister has any credibility in trying to push forward a zero tolerance on speeding.
Clearly he's someone who has either never lived in the real world,or just another government idiot trying to sound good.
The latter is the fact of the matter,because zero tolerance on speeding is an impossible objective,some people's opinion on this thread is at varience with that view.

Why is zero tolerance impossible?

You just issue FPNs with each detected offence - whether it's 1 or 100 mph over the posted limit (note that the FPN might be scaled, and might be issued in addition to a court summons for 100mph over)

It's just a case of saying publicly - You know what. The limit is actually the limit. The limit isn't some 10%+2 rubbish....

Speedo's are legally obliged to be with 5% and may not under-read speed... So you can't blame that any more. Could even add it to the MOT for 30 and 60 (they have rolling roads don't they?)

[thirdcrank]

I wouldn't assume we are heading for automatic speed control, in the sense of imposing limits. Driverless vehicle systems would be facilitated by the removal of anything unpredictable: pedestrians, cyclists, equestrians and of course, driver-controlled cars. With them "out of the road," driverless cars could move at much higher speeds, communicating with each other to reduce the risk of colliding.

[pwa]

Actually, if we are thinking ahead to a not-too-distant future when motor vehicles are physically unable to speed, speed limits should be constantly varying as the conditions vary. We will be able to do away with the nonsense of 30mph transitioning to 60mph with nothing in between. The limit could go from 30 to 31,32... And it could vary according to the time of day, the weather and any other variable. As a driver you could keep your foot down and just accept you are not going to go any faster than allowed, and do your bit by keeping an eye open for hazards. Speed cameras would be unnecessary, as would all traffic calming.

But we're not thinking ahead about a future world,but debating whether some stuffed shift Tory minister has any credibility in trying to push forward a zero tolerance on speeding.
Clearly he's someone who has either never lived in the real world,or just another government idiot trying to sound good.
The latter is the fact of the matter,because zero tolerance on speeding is an impossible objective,some people's opinion on this thread is at varience with that view.

Why is zero tolerance impossible?

You just issue FPNs with each detected offence - whether it's 1 or 100 mph over the posted limit (note that the FPN might be scaled, and might be issued in addition to a court summons for 100mph over)

It's just a case of saying publicly - You know what. The limit is actually the limit. The limit isn't some 10%+2 rubbish....

Speedo's are legally obliged to be with 5% and may not under-read speed... So you can't blame that any more. Could even add it to the MOT for 30 and 60 (they have rolling roads don't they?)

You are right to say that from the point of view of the police it would be easy to issue a ticket to every driver found to be 1mph over the limit. The problem with that is that people are generally under time pressure and cannot, unless they are retired or on holiday, stick to 5mph under the limit. They have places to get to, deadlines to meet, things to do in their busy lives. So they will be under pressure to get close to what is deemed to be the safe limit. And being human they will get it slightly wrong from time to time. I know we are in the presence of a few perfect human beings on this Forum who never get it wrong, but for those of us who are mortal it is unreasonable to expect and demand 100% compliance down to the tiniest detail. And it is wrong to punish slight imperfection. The Taliban element would have us chopping hands off for the most trivial mistakes, but I think that is wrong. It is punishing humans for being human.

And think of commercial drivers, people who do 20 or 30k a year. Let's imagine we have a commercial driver who really tries to stick to limits, in spite of the pressures put on them to get from A to B quickly. Like all of us they will have the occasional lapse where they lack concentration and brake a bit late for a speed limit change. But because of the high number of miles they do they will have more lapses than low mileage drivers. On a lapses per 10,000 miles basis. Yet the points on their licences will accrue in the same way as for someone who does 5K a year. With zero tolerance it could become too risky to take such a job, unless you are perfect.

[Bonefishblues]

Why is zero tolerance impossible?

You just issue FPNs with each detected offence - whether it's 1 or 100 mph over the posted limit (note that the FPN might be scaled, and might be issued in addition to a court summons for 100mph over)

It's just a case of saying publicly - You know what. The limit is actually the limit. The limit isn't some 10%+2 rubbish....

Speedo's are legally obliged to be with 5% and may not under-read speed... So you can't blame that any more. Could even add it to the MOT for 30 and 60 (they have rolling roads don't they?)

Ten percent, not five.

The MOT rolling road is a load-based device to test brake effectiveness, not speed.

[reohn2]

Why is zero tolerance impossible?

First tell me how it's possible to implement

You just issue FPNs with each detected offence - whether it's 1 or 100 mph over the posted limit (note that the FPN might be scaled, and might be issued in addition to a court summons for 100mph over)

It's just a case of saying publicly - You know what. The limit is actually the limit. The limit isn't some 10%+2 rubbish....

Speedo's are legally obliged to be with 5% and may not under-read speed... So you can't blame that any more. Could even add it to the MOT for 30 and 60 (they have rolling roads don't they?)

There's a lot could be done to catch speeding motorists,but(for the umpteenth time)the government have decided that it's more important to cut police budgets by a third,which in turn means a third less resourses on our streets.
We now have a reactive policing strategy rather than a proactive one and as such policing is being prioratised by percieved importance and thinly spread,which means 1 to 2mph over the limit isn't possible to police.
That's the fact of the matter

I'd suggest,though don't know for sure,that the 5% speedo accuracy is also given an extra 5% tolerance for misjudgement making a 10% error tolerance which IMO is reasonable,1 to 2mph isn't for the reasons I've posted.
TBH I'd rather see the police concentrating on the dangerous driver crime such as in the video link I posted up thread and the likes of the SMIDSY driver who hit you,rather than trying to catch people for 1 or 2 mph over any given limit.

[Bonefishblues]

I wouldn't assume we are heading for automatic speed control, in the sense of imposing limits. Driverless vehicle systems would be facilitated by the removal of anything unpredictable: pedestrians, cyclists, equestrians and of course, driver-controlled cars. With them "out of the road," driverless cars could move at much higher speeds, communicating with each other to reduce the risk of colliding.

Indeed - a win-win situation for some in that motorists get there more quickly, and road capacity is enhanced. Whether cyclists would welcome this, one doubts.

[reohn2]

I wouldn't assume we are heading for automatic speed control, in the sense of imposing limits. Driverless vehicle systems would be facilitated by the removal of anything unpredictable: pedestrians, cyclists, equestrians and of course, driver-controlled cars. With them "out of the road," driverless cars could move at much higher speeds, communicating with each other to reduce the risk of colliding.

Indeed - a win-win situation for some in that motorists get there more quickly, and road capacity is enhanced. Whether cyclists would welcome this, one doubts.

Not just cyclists...

[[XAP]Bob]

Why is zero tolerance impossible?

First tell me how it's possible to implement

You just issue FPNs with each detected offence - whether it's 1 or 100 mph over the posted limit (note that the FPN might be scaled, and might be issued in addition to a court summons for 100mph over)

It's just a case of saying publicly - You know what. The limit is actually the limit. The limit isn't some 10%+2 rubbish....

Speedo's are legally obliged to be with 5% and may not under-read speed... So you can't blame that any more. Could even add it to the MOT for 30 and 60 (they have rolling roads don't they?)

There's a lot could be done to catch speeding motorists,but(for the umpteenth time)the government have decided that it's more important to cut police budgets by a third,which in turn means a third less resourses on our streets.
We now have a reactive policing strategy rather than a proactive one and as such policing is being prioratised by percieved importance and thinly spread,which means 1 to 2mph over the limit isn't possible to police.
That's the fact of the matter

I'd suggest,though don't know for sure,that the 5% speedo accuracy is also given an extra 5% tolerance for misjudgement making a 10% error tolerance which IMO is reasonable,1 to 2mph isn't for the reasons I've posted.
TBH I'd rather see the police concentrating on the dangerous driver crime such as in the video link I posted up thread and the likes of the SMIDSY driver who hit you,rather than trying to catch people for 1 or 2 mph over any given limit.

I just did - you just issue the FPN for anything over the limit.

You don't need to 'try' and catch people doing over the limit, it's trivial to measure and issue FPN. Doesn't take a police officer at all, just a data entry clerk.

I know the rolling roads aren't set for speed measurements, but there is no reason they couldn't be fitted for such...

[Psamathe]

Calibration of the speed detecting machines can be an issue - one brought home to me last Fri when driving through a nearby town. We have loads of these "display your speed devices" everywhere these days and they are pretty consistent and tell me when my speedo reads 30 I'm actually doing 27/28. I went through one last Fri with speedo reading 30 and the device flashed red showing 37/39 (it varied). I was not being "done" as it was just one of those "encourage you to slow down" devices but I am completely confident about my speed (no way was I over what all the other devices read as 27/28) and when people see such abysmal over reading they will quickly ignore the devices and some will be encouraged to contest and fines issues from "proper" speed cameras.

Ian

[reohn2]

I just did - you just issue the FPN for anything over the limit.

You don't need to 'try' and catch people doing over the limit, it's trivial to measure and issue FPN. Doesn't take a police officer at all, just a data entry clerk......

It seems all Ive posted on this thread has been ignored so I'll give a brief summary.
The system isn't capable of measuring to an accuracy or 1 or 2mph.
It's been decided by government we don't have the resourses to effectively fight road crime.
There are much more important dangerous driving issues than 1 or 2mph over any given limit.
The minister who issued the statement is an idiot and a headline seeker.
The world isn't perfect,that doesn't mean there isn't room for improvement,but personally 1 or 2mph over the limit isn't gross negligence
YVMV,mine won't

[Cyril Haearn]

Calibration of the speed detecting machines can be an issue - one brought home to me last Fri when driving through a nearby town. We have loads of these "display your speed devices" everywhere these days and they are pretty consistent and tell me when my speedo reads 30 I'm actually doing 27/28. I went through one last Fri with speedo reading 30 and the device flashed red showing 37/39 (it varied). I was not being "done" as it was just one of those "encourage you to slow down" devices but I am completely confident about my speed (no way was I over what all the other devices read as 27/28) and when people see such abysmal over reading they will quickly ignore the devices and some will be encouraged to contest and fines issues from "proper" speed cameras.

Ian

Maybe it was clocking a vehicle behind you
I did see one showing 98, it was obviously faulty

[thirdcrank]

I'm not clear where this is leading but it would be wrong to draw conclusions about official speed cameras from less accurate gadgets. I've a vague recollection - and there may be a thread somewhere - about some self-accredited (?) speed camera expert who briefly began to appear arguing that this or that feature at individual camera sites might have impaired the reading, sunshine bouncing off railings etc. Nobody else in court with the expertise to rebut his evidence so hey presto! reasonable doubt and case not proved. IIRC, ACPO identified a suitable expert and requested an adjournment whenever the defence called theirs so the ACPO expert could be called, prosecution costs estimated to be around £1,500 IRC. Another dodgy loophole plugged. All IIRC.

[Psamathe]

I'm not clear where this is leading but it would be wrong to draw conclusions about official speed cameras from less accurate gadgets. I've a vague recollection - and there may be a thread somewhere - about some self-accredited (?) speed camera expert who briefly began to appear arguing that this or that feature at individual camera sites might have impaired the reading, sunshine bouncing off railings etc. Nobody else in court with the expertise to rebut his evidence so hey presto! reasonable doubt and case not proved. IIRC, ACPO identified a suitable expert and requested an adjournment whenever the defence called theirs so the ACPO expert could be called, prosecution costs estimated to be around £1,500 IRC. Another dodgy loophole plugged. All IIRC.

I raised the "warning ones" as I don't know where they come from (community financed, Highways, etc.) but that very inaccurate ones can encourage a perception (probably mostly amongst those who habitually speed) that the speed detecting devices are "unreliable" and thus can be ignored and contested should they receive a fine/points through the post.

Ian

[thirdcrank]

You can buy various alcohol breath testing gadgets online quite cheaply and I've no idea how accurate they are. I do know that when the Home Office moved to replace the old glass-tube breathalysers with the hand-held portable jobbies the field testing was extremely thorough because I was involved with the testing. Although I had a bit less direct involvement, the change from relying on blood or urine specimens to definitive breath testing was also very thorough. AFAIK, all that testing before approval has ensured the reliability of the kit in operational conditions ie operated by cack-handed police. For the individual there's a lot at stake but the equipment - and I include speed cameras seems sound to me.

[Vorpal]

Average speed enforcement has been shown to be successful at improving compliance, reducing crashes and crash severity, and improving traffic flow.

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/a ... 7513000432

As far as equipment capability goes, there is a relationship between cost, and accuracy & precision. It is possible, but cost prohibitive to measure automobile speeds within 0.1 mph.

Speedometers can generally be rather more accurate than the standards require. Modern computers, with correct inputs and correclty inlfated tyres are much more accurate. In addition, the standards require speedometers to read at or above the actual speed (that is the tolerance is +%/-0), so while is it legal for your car to tell you that you are going 70 when you are only going 66, it's not in a legal condition if it says you are going 66 when you are actually going 70. I know that my car is very near the maximum allowed deviation (that is, it says I am going 100 kph, when I am actually going 93 kph). That means that if drivers drive so that their vehicle register that they are within the limit, there is no reason ever to drive faster than the speed limit. Someone who has poor speed control should be aware of this and consequently drive a little slower to compensate (or not drive at all).

Enforcement coverage is currently an issue, but an investment in average speed cameras will quickly pay for itself in traffic improvements and crash cost reductions.

edited to add: with average speed cameras, the computers can quickly discern if one of the speed cameras is reading incorrectly for some reason. The software already identifies this.