If my opinion is read and earns me 1p, I will return the complement. If my opinion is read and DOES ...
If my opinion is read and earns me 1p, I will return the complement. If my opinion is read and DOES NOT earn me 1p, I MAY NOT return the complement. Sorry but my time is precious. I expect nothing different in return.
Member since:24.10.2000
Reviews:258
Members who trust:42
Speed limits are something that probably most drivers consider as having to be adhered to by everyone except himself or herself. It would certainly seem so judging by the way drivers behave on our roads.
As a society we have laws to govern the way that we behave towards each other and they are for the general benefit of ALL. It would be impossible to run a society otherwise, without descending into anarchy.
So if we have a law that limits the speed of traffic on a road then that is that. Break the law and risk prosecution for doing so.
Some people will argue that because of the inaccuracy of speedometers in cars and lorries and the parallax error that can occur when viewing a speedometer, there should be some leeway about enforcing the speed limits. These factors could mean that although you think you are doing 30 mph you are in fact doing 35 or more or even less. To add to a driver's troubles the radar
gun that clocks a car's speed is accurate to at least one hundredth of a mile per hour. It doesn't seem fair that the driver has to use an instrument that is known to be far from accurate to measure his speed, yet is judged by a police instrument that is highly accurate. That still doesn't give us the right to break the law. That is an argument for the ensuing court case.
The speed limits are just that. The sign that says 30 mph is the MAXIMUM that is allowed and 30.1 mph IS over the limit.
The Breathalyser rules are strict. One point over the limit and it is curtains. So why shouldn't the speeding rules be the same?
We all KNOW that speedometers can be up to 10% inaccurate and some people will know about parallax error, so we should take that into account when driving. Better to drive at 25 mph and be sure of being under the limit than driving at 30 mph only to find that we were clocked at 35 mph.
If we start "bending" the law to take into account these inaccuracies, where do we stop? "But officer we are allowed a 10% error margin and although my speedo read 33 mph I knew that I was within the limit". Oh! Yes!
The law by its very nature has to be inflexible. The flexibility comes in the judgement as to the degree of guilt.
In practice the police do exercise some discretion when confronting a motorist driving a few mph over the limit. On a wet road in a crowded town 35 mph will get you booked. On a dry road on a Sunday morning with hardly a soul about 35 mph will get you a ticking off.
However to keep a constant eye on the speedometer and not on the road ahead is inherently dangerous so we drivers are in a bit of cleft stick. Maybe vehicle manufacturers should design Their products with a digital speedometer positioned right at the bottom of the windscreen in front of the driver and not partially obscured by the steering wheel. Seeking a "head up" display is going a bit too far.
The Transport Minister wants to make our streets safer for children to walk along, by reducing the residential area speed limit to 20 mph. In doing so he is condemning our children, and us, to more exhaust pollution.
A car at that speed must travel in third gear or maybe even second. The revs of an engine in third gear at 20 mph are higher than in fourth gear at 30 mph. Ergo, more exhaust fumes, more pollution. Granted there are fewer accidents and a person is more likely to survive being hit by a car travelling at 15 or 20 mph than one going along at 30 mph - only to die of some lung disease caused by the additional pollution.
The 30 mph limit should stay except in the approaches to schools, hospitals, old folks homes etc. where the limit should be 15 mph and strictly enforced.
All the mini roundabouts, road narrowing, traffic humps have probably reduced the number of accidents but in doing so have increased petrol/diesel consumption and pollution. Good for the government. Bad for our pockets and lungs.
Er! Parallax error. Don't know what I'm talking about? I'll try to explain.
Take two pencils or pens and position them about an inch apart directly behind each other in front of your face. Now look at the front pencil so that it covers the back pencil. You are now looking directly at the front pencil. Keeping the pencils still, now move your head to the right an inch or so. The front pencil appears to move to the left.
If the back pencil represents the speedo dial and the front pencil represents the speedo needle you can see that by not looking directly over the needle you can get a wrong reading. Any electrician worth his salt will know about parallax error as the multimeters that they use have a mirror embedded in the face to enable you to align the needle with it's image, thus ensuring that you are looking directly at the dial and getting an accurate reading.
Anyone know of a car where the speedometer is directly in front of the driver?
How helpful would this review be to a person making a buying decision? Rating guidelines
I suppose one way of helping us keep to the right speed without looking down at the dash would be some kind of adjustable bleeper to warn when we were close to a particular limit - as sort of poor-man's cruise control. Personally I would gladly accept a 20 mph limit locally, if they would just take the bloody speed ramps away!
davidbuttery 30.01.2001 02:42
I've given this a VH because it's so well argued. I barely agree with a word you say (AFAIK, the estimate of road casualties saved by a 20mph limit is greatly in excess of any excess pollution - which is a dubious argument anyway, as pollution depends on a lot more than revs). As I say, though, it's so well laid out that VH is the only option. Very interesting.
ndf9876 30.01.2001 00:53
Very true jimbuck - often the result of speeding is, sadly, injury - and unfortunately, in a few cases, death. But under the current penalty system, an indivudual caught speeding can simply be fined - giving the individual little or no incentive not to re-offend. I personally think that the punishments given to those who cause injury through driving (be it dangerous driving, DUI etc) are too lenient.
Advantages: Labour might be right when they say education is the key Disadvantages: You can never stop foolish people getting behind the wheel of a car
juliab 15.03.2001 ·
Read review
Ciao members have rated this review on average: helpful
Review of Urban Speed Limits
Advantages: Price, well-equipped, mostly well made, some original design features, linked brakes Disadvantages: Awkward separate lock for seat, suspension, over-light steering, view in mirrors, turbulence
TrueVision 25.01.2009 ·
Read review
Ciao members have rated this review on average: very helpful
Review of SYM GTS 250
Advantages: They promote safety and do slow some people, even if only temporarily Disadvantages: They don't catch the real speeders, cause they know where they are and slow for the camera
Kkaos 05.05.2001 (05.05.2001)
·
Read review
Ciao members have rated this review on average: very helpful
Review of Speed Cameras
Are you the manufacturer / provider of Urban Speed Limits? Click here
Jan 30th, 2001
very helpful by (75%):
helpful by (25%):
