Bournemouth Speeding Checks Arghhhhhh!

[Mick F]

I'll believe road policing is changing for the better when someone who overtakes me too close or cuts me up is pulled over and prosecuted. It's never happened yet despite the sheer number of such offences and I don't expect with the way policing is going for it to happen any time soon.

Agree.

I've volunteered to be part of the Community Speed Watch system. I emailed the people in charge, and they thanked me for my offer. The trouble is, there's only me! Until they can get a few of us together, it's a non-starter.

It would appear that most folk are bad drivers and don't want to be judging other bad drivers, despite the fact that we've all been taught properly. I'm not a bad driver, in fact I'm a good one, but I seem to be in a very very very small minority.

Oh, and I passed my Cycling Proficiency Test!

[kwackers]

Doh! Because to be able to state something isn't being taught you need to talk to the people that do the training. You can't simply make such a sweeping statement!

I think you're being overly pedantic and taking my post far more literally than I intended. However in fairness I'll accept that as written it's incorrect. However there is a problem be it with training or with whatever is happening after.

It may well be as you say "peer pressure" but you can demonstrate many instances where this is questionable. For example, people will always believe they can judge things better themselves - i.e. speed etc. That's a fact of human nature, we can't change it so we have to work with it.
So given that they believe this, when tested very few find they can come even close to figuring out for a given speed/conditions how far they need to react and stop. They can quote the figures, but they can't translate it into the real world.
Doesn't that suggest an area training could be improved upon? Some sort of 'real world' simulation?

Remember though, the UK still has one of the best road safety records worldwide. So we are doing a lot better than many countries.

Nigel

How do we compare when you start comparing vulnerable group records though? Also, there's more to the roads than just safety, we all know that in reality we're not actually that likely to be killed cycling along, but even though I'm acclimatised to people overtaking too close it'd make my cycling a lot more pleasant if people were just a tiny bit more thoughtful and added just one extra foot to the right when doing it...
In some countries you can put your toes into the road and drivers will pull up and wave you across - here you'd just get run over whilst the driver circumvents their obligations by sounding the horn.

[adinigel]

Sorry, but I don't agree that MOST people are bad drivers. I would suggest that MOST drivers are pretty average. Yes there are some total muppets out there but there are some good ones too.

Some will not want to have their driving criticised but there are more and more companies signing up to put their drivers on defensive driving courses. There are several reasons for this, many companies find their accident rates drop and therefore the cost of insurance will also drop. Some companies are scared by the corporate manslaughter laws.

Someone mentioned being overtaken dangerously close by about 3 or 4 car drivers per WEEK. How many car drivers overtook you all together? I bet the 3 or 4 is a tiny minority of all the cars overtaking in the week.

Yes there is still a lot more work to be done, even though the number of people killed or seriously injured in the UK has dropped to just below 3000 it is still too high.

I would like to see a comprehensive training course running all through school life with Bikeability levels 1 & 2 completed before children move up to secondary school. Then bring in level 3 around years 7/8. Mopeds? restrict the CBT to 6 months instead of the current 2 years. Currently 16 year olds can buy a moped and the only training they have to do is a 1 day CBT course. They can then use the moped for 2 years without having to take a test. This is taken advantage of by many moped riders - they tend to ditch the moped once they pass their driving test. If the CBT was to run out after 6 months, then further training and a test would have to be taken.

Nigel

[adinigel]

....It may well be as you say "peer pressure" but you can demonstrate many instances where this is questionable. For example, people will always believe they can judge things better themselves - i.e. speed etc. That's a fact of human nature, we can't change it so we have to work with it.
So given that they believe this, when tested very few find they can come even close to figuring out for a given speed/conditions how far they need to react and stop. They can quote the figures, but they can't translate it into the real world.
Doesn't that suggest an area training could be improved upon? Some sort of 'real world' simulation?

Perhaps. Personally I take each of my pupils to a quiet road and get then to do emergency stops at both 30 & 35 so they can see the difference between the 2 stopping distances. They tend to be quite shocked when there is consistently a full car length difference.

....In some countries you can put your toes into the road and drivers will pull up and wave you across - here you'd just get run over whilst the driver circumvents their obligations by sounding the horn.

Well that depends on where you put your feet. At a Zebra crossing, in this country, you are likely to be pretty safe. Abroad, the rules aren't quite so pedestrian friendly with pedestrians having no priority over the cars. Personally I think it is pretty stupid behaviour to put your foot into the road when there is a vehicle approaching and you're not at some sort of pedestrian crossing!

Nigel

[Cunobelin]

Possibly - but a visible police presence is more likely to result in people driving better since they're more likely to think they'll be seen. Isn't that the point of the exercise?

But don't you realise that this is dangerous?

Manchester put out Police Officers in cars armed with video to increase their area of awareness , the Officer then decided which offences to book and issued penalties accordingly - exactly what you require - Visible Police Officers using their judgement and acting upon their experience..

Then we had the usual bleating about how these officers were persecuting, and hounding motorists

The funniest of the bleatings by the poor lambs was that by having marked Police vehicles the Police were endangering road users and increasing injuries

Apparently using marked and visible Police vehicles the motorist is "forced" to look for these vehicles instead of concentrating on the road, thus causing accidents, injuries and deaths!


A visible Police presence is (aparently) a significant road safety hazard and therefore should not be allowed. Rather scuppers the idea of a visible presence.

So I'll re-iterate.
I'll believe road policing is changing for the better when someone who overtakes me too close or cuts me up is pulled over and prosecuted. It's never happened yet despite the sheer number of such offences and I don't expect with the way policing is going for it to happen any time soon.

Nor will it ever.....it is a pipe dream and a red herring.

Lets take a Police vehicle with one Police Officer patrolling - they can only effectively cover an area of 50 yards, so that makes several hundered officers per mile to give the sort of coverage suggested here - now lets consider the cover for absence when writing up these offences, lunch etc and we are probably looking at 1.5 Officers per 50 yards - an impracticable dream.

I'd be interested in seeing a breakdown of these motoring offences - is it across the board or as I suspect a massive increase in speeding and a massive drop in everything else?

[/quote][/quote]

The sad fact is that the drivers that are caught with the technology are exactly the ones that are driving dangerously, as the correlations between say speeding or driving without tax and/ or insurance are unequivocally linked with higher accident rates. (A driver caught speeding is statistically twice as likely to be involved in an injury accident in the next twelve months for instance). Zero tolerance for road offences will help to identify and remove exactly the drivers you are so concerned about. It is not an ideal, but certainly an effective tool.... and is still functioning additionally to the road policing elsewhere.

[kwackers]

Sorry, but I don't agree that MOST people are bad drivers. I would suggest that MOST drivers are pretty average. Yes there are some total muppets out there but there are some good ones too.

See below.

Someone mentioned being overtaken dangerously close by about 3 or 4 car drivers per WEEK. How many car drivers overtook you all together? I bet the 3 or 4 is a tiny minority of all the cars overtaking in the week.

That may well have been me - but the number is 3 to 4 per DAY. Sure I get overtaken by a fair number of cars over the 27 miles so it's not the end of the world.
However, it's not just this one thing that colours my opinion, in cases where there is some conflict - for example holding primary waiting to get onto a busy roundabout then the number of times drivers around me will do something that imo has the potential to be dangerous (requiring action on my part to avoid the conflict) then the numbers go well up. My estimate of 30-40% of drivers is arrived at by projecting the number of times I'm in a 'conflict' situation with the percentage of how often it's properly dealt with.

(Just to clarify what I consider 'conflict', it's where I need to occupy the road properly - i.e primary, roundabouts, right turns etc When you'd expect a competent driver to hold back and be patient, as opposed to secondary where for the most part drivers can pretty much be on automatic and apart from moving over a bit don't really have to think).

[kwackers]

Well that depends on where you put your feet. At a Zebra crossing, in this country, you are likely to be pretty safe. Abroad, the rules aren't quite so pedestrian friendly with pedestrians having no priority over the cars. Personally I think it is pretty stupid behaviour to put your foot into the road when there is a vehicle approaching and you're not at some sort of pedestrian crossing!

Nigel

I was in Vancouver not so long ago and whilst there did a fair bit of running, at points where I was considering crossing the roads no sooner had I looked over my shoulder to see if the way was clear than traffic more often than not would stop and wave me across. I'm not suggesting attempting to cross a road regardless of traffic is a good idea but it does show the marked difference in attitude. I'd be surprised if most people in this country were even aware of pedestrians on the pavements let alone their intentions - and even if they were aware of both they're not usually prepared to yield to them. Even crossing a slow moving congested road using the pedestrian route near me can be hit and miss - they might not have anywhere to go but a good proportion aren't too keen on you crossing (even on foot) in front of them.

[johncharles]

ADNIGEL

Who is going to do all that training you would like to see done in schools then and where is the time required going to come from

[Cunobelin]

ADNIGEL

Who is going to do all that training you would like to see done in schools then and where is the time required going to come from

...and what restrictions does that place on them?

I used to do the cycling badge with local Cubs and Scouts but the Scout Association insists on helmets. That excludes many of the boys, whose parents have decided not to force them into wearing helmets. Equally we used to raise £1000 per year with a sponsored cycle ride, ut as all the participamts require helmets it is a gain a non-starter.

[thirdcrank]

....In some countries you can put your toes into the road and drivers will pull up and wave you across - here you'd just get run over whilst the driver circumvents their obligations by sounding the horn.

Well that depends on where you put your feet. At a Zebra crossing, in this country, you are likely to be pretty safe. Abroad, the rules aren't quite so pedestrian friendly with pedestrians having no priority over the cars. Personally I think it is pretty stupid behaviour to put your foot into the road when there is a vehicle approaching and you're not at some sort of pedestrian crossing!

Nigel

IMO I don't think using zebra crossings in the UK is at all safe, and I think it can be pretty risky to put your foot on a zebra crossing before the traffic has stopped. (OTOH, I'm sure that as a driving instructor you know that a pedestrian has no priority on a zebra crossing until they are off the footway and actually crossing the road. Also, a driver need only give a pedestrian precedence so at least as far as the zebra regs go, they can set off again just as soon as they like once they can physically get between the pedestrain and the kerb.)

On the subject of more driver training, I can understand that driving instructors would be keen on that. IMO what is really needed is more assessment of drivers' psychological suitability to be in charge of a motor vehicle. (I have to say that on many occasions I see solo drivers in driving school cars who I will assume are driving instructors and there is nothing other than the livery of the car that gives any clue as to the higher driving standards of the driver.)

Probably not much to do with police officers snooping behind the deckchair hut.....

[Cunobelin]

The standard of driving instructor speaks for itself.

Now one must wonder if these "skills" and poor attitude are being passed on to their pupils?

[kwackers]

The standard of driving instructor speaks for itself.

Now one must wonder if these "skills" and poor attitude are being passed on to their pupils?

It's a well known fact that if you can get the nose of your vehicle in front of a cyclist then you automatically have right of way. Really Cunobelin don't you know anything of the ways of the road?

[Mick F]

(I have to say that on many occasions I see solo drivers in driving school cars who I will assume are driving instructors and there is nothing other than the livery of the car that gives any clue as to the higher driving standards of the driver.)

That's my experience too on MANY an occasion.
I wouldn't want to tar everyone with the same brush, of course......

I still believe that drivers drive badly because that's what "everyone" does.
We don't all drive badly, just most of us.

[adinigel]

ADNIGEL

Who is going to do all that training you would like to see done in schools then and where is the time required going to come from

How about the Bikeability trainers?

Nigel

[adinigel]

........(OTOH, I'm sure that as a driving instructor you know that a pedestrian has no priority on a zebra crossing until they are off the footway and actually crossing the road. Also, a driver need only give a pedestrian precedence so at least as far as the zebra regs go, they can set off again just as soon as they like once they can physically get between the pedestrain and the kerb.)That wouldn't be a particularly sensible thing to do in case the pedestrian turns round when they remember something they forgot!

On the subject of more driver training, I can understand that driving instructors would be keen on thatThe fact that I am a drioving instructor is, actually, irrelevant. Education will often work better than enforcement. IMO what is really needed is more assessment of drivers' psychological suitability to be in charge of a motor vehicle. (I have to say that on many occasions I see solo drivers in driving school cars who I will assume are driving instructorsI wouldn't assume they are instructors since other family members may drive the training car. On the other hand there are few barriers to prevent muppets becoming instructors! and there is nothing other than the livery of the car that gives any clue as to the higher driving standards of the driver.)

Probably not much to do with police officers snooping behind the deckchair hut.....