The Speed Trap - BBC1 Scotland

"Patrick Herring" wrote in message
...
"Matt B" wrote:
|
| Patrick Herring" wrote in message
| ...
| "Matt B" wrote:
| ...
| | Seriously though, do you think that concentrating on arbitrary speed
| | limits,
|
| I've read this word before in this context. Could you clarify what you
| mean by "arbitrary" here?
|
| The random selection of a value below which you can drive with impunity
and
| above which you can loose your livlihood. Is 30 mph the perfect speed
for
| all built-up areas? If it is what sets it apart from, say, 29 or 31
mph?
| How come in France they settled on 31.07 mph? Don't tell me higher
speed is
| safer in km/h ;-)

Ah, I thought so. That isn't what "arbitrary" means

See second definition in:
http://www.chambersharrap.co.uk/cham...ary&title=21st

"discretionary; based on subjective factors or random choice and not on
objective principles."

As I said "random". The value, as in France would have been different if
the units we used were different.

--
Matt B

Patrick Herring wrote:
I don't see the speed limits as defining the safe limit

Of course not - they define the /legal/ limit, which is probably well
within the "safe" limit, as defined by ideal driving conditions.

If only Matt B could grasp this simple concept...

d.

Marz wrote:
You're still an arse unable to fathom both points of view.

You're a latecomer to this discussion and you appear not to have
anything useful to add to it, so why not just **** off. And take your
meaningless platitudes with you.

d.

"davek" wrote in message
...
Patrick Herring wrote:
I don't see the speed limits as defining the safe limit

Of course not - they define the /legal/ limit, which is probably well
within the "safe" limit, as defined by ideal driving conditions.

Do you think? For every place you can show me where the speed limit is
'within the "safe" limit' I'll show you one where only a serious nutter
would consider that driving anywhere near the speed limit to be safe.

If only Matt B could grasp this simple concept...

Which, the one that I've been trying to explain here, on and off, for years,
that you can be dangerous at speeds other than one which happens to be above
an arbitrary limit?

--
Matt B

Marz wrote:
The speed of the vehicle
will decide the outcome, near miss, collision or death.

So slow down, ****wit.

d.

Mark Thompson wrote:
Staying accident-free relies to a great deal on _not_ assuming that people
will follow the highway code.

....especially other motorists.

d.

Matt B wrote:
What others would you include in a broader discussion... noise? air
displacement?

the law?

d.

Matt B wrote:
As I said "random".

But it clearly isn't random. If it were, you'd get speed limits of, for
example, 93mph on one motorway and 24mph on another motorway, while the
local high street would see boy racers burning down at a perfectly legal
87mph and the high street of the neighbouring town would have otherwise
law-abiding people getting done for exceeding 4mph.

d.

"davek" wrote in message
...
Matt B wrote:
What others would you include in a broader discussion... noise? air
displacement?

the law?

What, you think that a good reason for choosing a speed below the limit,
other than for safety, possibly noise reduction, and "bow wave" impact
should be "the law"? I'm baffled.

--
Matt B

We are having a generalised discussion here yet people keep getting into
specifics about what speed they think would be right on what particular
road. Why dont we stick to the point?

Speed cameras are a good thing in my opinion because they force people
to consider their speed. Its quite pathetic that you have to use
punishment to get people to drive at moderate speeds but people are
thick.

There's always going to be some arse who just doesn't care or is
incapable of considering the consequences of his actions so this is the
only way when there are so many road users. If we used some sort of
aptitude test to determine who has the right and wrong attitude for
driving then maybe we would get somewhere but imagine trying to get a
law like that passed (especially in the UK with TB at the helm!).

With regards the actual speed limits well they have to be set at
something. They may seem slow at times but they have to take into
account all possible conditions and all possible driver skill levels.
Certainly leaving the speed up to the individual would be madness as
that is something that is very difficult to call even with some
background research not just how a given road seems at the time. Apart
from that almost everyone I have ever spoke to thinks they are much
better and more skilled than they really are.

What really bothers me are the kinds of things I have read in my
friends motoring magazines. I remember the editor of Autocar
criticising the government becuase they have made this country
impossible to 'enjoy our cars' in. He was refering to the fact that he
couldn't speed around in his car because he would get in trouble. What
an appalling atitude and unbelievably arrogant.


--
MichaelB