How to get speeding drivers to slow down.

On May 11, 8:21*pm, thaksin wrote:
Sir Jeremy wrote:
On 11 May, 13:21, spindrift wrote:
On May 11, 1:11 pm, Sir Jeremy wrote:

On 11 May, 12:08, spindrift wrote:
A Safespeed supporter who recklessly and illegally overtakes and then
threatens a lone female, class!
Not at all- a safe overtake. She gave me the dickhead sign and I
wanted to ask what her problem was. Nothing threatening- she shouldn't
make rude gestures if she doesn't want to get involved
You admitted you broke the law. You exceeded the speed limit. Did you
go back and interview every other road user, pedestrian, cyclist,
child and old person to see if they thought your erratic, aggressive
driving was 'safe'?

Thought not.

Just get out of bed earlier or leave more time for your journey, and
if you habitually get out of your car and approach women on their own
I look forward to you getting a tyre iron wrapped round your skull.

FOAD. I've never had an accident or conviction of any sort in almost
40 years of driving

Dont rise to the ****s bait - this is just the sort of twisting replies
that got the stupid cnut banned from his beloved forums

It's hard not to rise to it, and I'm certainly no role model in that
respect, but I have to agree (although it would be nice if he did
FOAD). The important thing is not to take it personally: he hates
*all* motorists, especially those who wish to make reasonable progress
(they should put up with being unnecessarily impeded with good grace,
because they're lucky to be allowed to drive at all), and the
"reckless" accusations are merely his standard way of attempting to
have a go at them no matter how safe their behaviour has actually
been. Of course, such blatant abuse of terms such as "reckless" and
"dangerous" does devalue those terms...or at least it would if
Spindrift didn't have such a reputation as a complete and utter
headcase who will do *anything* he can to find fault with drivers.

You've just got to keep telling yourself: "Car-hating fruitcake,
doesn't really give a stuff about anyone's safety, an insult from him
is a compliment", etc. No-one whose opinion it's worth caring about
is in the slightest doubt about that.

Likewise with people like the stupid bitch mentioned above. If
someone is quite obviously wrong about something, like members of the
"Overtaking is always dangerous/No-one should be going any faster than
me/I like to have a line of at least 3 vehicles behind me at all times
because I'm a sad little control freak/I never go above 40mph on any
single carriageway" brigade, what does it matter what they think about
me? If they're wrong, they're wrong. *They* are the ones who,
objectively, need to correct their POV; I'm not going to waste time or
effort worrying about them any more than I'd worry about some idiotic
street preacher telling me that the world was going to end in a week.

I will keep overtaking such people as and when it's safe, and their
****wit reactions will not deter me in the slightest: I will not be
bullied into not doing something which is perfectly safe and legal
(except for the possibility of momentarily exceeding an arbitrary
number on a stick, which no sensible person cares about in itself, and
which is *nothing* to do with the bad reaction that some dickheads
automatically give anyone who dares to think for themselves and
overtake them).

What irritates me the most about such people is that instead of
dealing robustly with them, and the congestion, danger and bad feeling
that they constantly inflict on the 90-95% of reasonable drivers
whenever it's busy, the authorities actually encourage them to think
that they're better than everyone else with their "Slower is safer,
faster is more dangerous" claptrap. It's absolutely infuriating, and
yet more evidence that the government is about as anti-motorist as it
could possibly get away with.

On May 12, 6:31*pm, Ian Smith wrote:
On Tue, 12 May, Light of Aria wrote:

*There are more important things in life to worry about than velocity

I know. *Nym-shifters for one.

What are you talking about Jellybelly? He's always been Light of Aria
AFAICT, and if he's changed the email address he posts under (I can't
be bothered to check), so what? Anyone who has killfiled him (which
would have to be for his POV, as usual with URC, since he never does
anything which could be reasonably be construed as trolling) can just
do so with his new address: he's hardly pretending to be anyone else.

I personally get more annoyed with people who lie by saying that
they've killfiled someone and then replying to them two weeks later.
What's that all about?

On May 12, 5:36*pm, "Simon Mason"
wrote:
"Light of Aria" wrote in message



One of my ideas:

All cars to have a series of lights on the front, adding one light per 5
MPH.

Therefore 6 lights = 30, 7 = 35, 8 = 40, 14 = 70 MPH etc.

This would warn road users of their velocity, simplify "enfarcement", make
it easier to judge crossings and junctions, and cause
excessive-speed-dickheads to stick out from more normalised users.

Or how about making it impossible to exceed the speed limit?

http://www.techradar.com/news/world-...ndon-transport...

More simplistic, anti-motorist, totalitarian, numerical speed-obsessed
rubbish which is *still* basing road "safety" on the idea that all
motorists are selfish, irresponsible nutters who constantly need even
the basics of driving to be done for them because they can't be
trusted an inch (if that's really true, we should stop people driving
altogether, which of course the car-haters would love...until it
finally got through their incredibly thick skulls the hard way that
that would have all sorts of other far-reaching consequences for
society).

Like the current obsession with digital speed limit enforcement, it
simply wouldn't work in terms of making things safer: in fact, it
would be an even bigger disaster. It's *so* wrong in so many
different ways. As someone who genuinely cares about road safety, I'm
sure you'd have a nasty surprise if "I"SA started to be used in every
vehicle. Not like the car-haters such as Chapman, who know perfectly
well that it would compromise safety...but that's "OK", because
motorists would be getting given a hard time, and so it would
apparently be "worth it". (Scum or what?)

http://www.speedlimit.org.uk/limiters.html

(That whole site is a great read...I agree with almost every word of
it. The majority of camera opponents on the Internet are rational,
thoughtful, intelligent, decent, nice, non-agenda-driven people who
you'd happily leave your kids with, and the author of that site is no
exception. Unfortunately the same cannot be said for most camera
supporters. That in itself should be enough to indicate the probable
validity of camera enforcement without even starting to analyse the
facts. It's no coincidence that all of the most universally despised,
mentally disturbed, callous, agenda-driven, dishonest people, such as
Chapman and Spindrift, support cameras.)

On May 11, 2:14*pm, "Simon Mason"
wrote:
"Sir Jeremy" wrote in message

...

That way lies madness. In a few years you'll be the one sitting on a
park bench with your can of Strong Brew howling at passers-by.

I don't touch beer 5% - it's the slippery slope!

Well, at least you're consistent when it comes to promoting arbitrary
figures far beyond their level of importance.

On May 11, 12:54*pm, spindrift wrote:
On May 11, 12:36*pm, "Mr Benn" %%%@%.%% wrote:



"Simon Mason" wrote in message

.uk...

"Sir Jeremy" wrote in message
....
On 11 May, 10:45, "Simon Mason" wrote:
This works every time. A car coming towards you is obviously speeding
and
you, being a responsible law abiding citizen, wish it to slow down lest
it
kills someone down the road. All you do is point behind you and shout
"speed
trap", then watch as they slam on their brakes and stick to the limit.
Some
even thank you!

*What the **** is it to do with you anyway?

Because I am a responsible law abiding citizen and like to do my bit for
road safety.

How do you know the oncoming car is speeding?

34 years of driving experience dear chap and the solid evidence of their
brake lights. If they are *NOT* speeding, why would they slam on the
brakes, eh?

So you're a driver? *You evil man!- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Mr Benn, there's no aniti-motorist sentiment here, most of us are
motorists after all!

If you feel that criticising BAD drivers is 'anti-motorist' then
there's not much I can do about it, but don't invent arguments that
haven't been made.

Oh give it up, you lying buffoon.

On May 11, 12:00*pm, "Simon Mason"
wrote:
"Sir Jeremy" wrote in message

...

On 11 May, 10:45, "Simon Mason" wrote:
This works every time. A car coming towards you is obviously speeding and
you, being a responsible law abiding citizen, wish it to slow down lest
it
kills someone down the road. All you do is point behind you and shout
"speed
trap", then watch as they slam on their brakes and stick to the limit.
Some
even thank you!

*What the **** is it to do with you anyway?

Because I am a responsible law abiding citizen and like to do my bit for
road safety.

PLEASE say that you don't sit in lane 3 of the motorway at what you
think is 70mph whether or not you're overtaking. There can be no
doubt that that crosses the line between a potentially honest (if
thoroughly misguided) effort at improving safety, and being a complete
self-righteous ****. As far as I'm concerned, anyone who does that
doesn't do it for safety, they do it because they're utterly
****witted control freaks who like to impede people and can't bear for
anyone to benefit from going faster than they are. More often than
not they prove that safety isn't their aim by getting their "revenge"
on people who pass them on the left by tailgating them, leaving their
full beam on, etc. (It's the same with dickheads who take exception
to being safely overtaken on single carriageways.)

How do you know the oncoming car is speeding?

34 years of driving experience dear chap and the solid evidence of their
brake lights. If they are *NOT* speeding, why would they slam on the brakes,
eh?

What, you've never seen anyone spot a camera and brake even when they
were already within the speed limit? If someone suddenly spots (or is
warned of) a camera, and they're not sure if they're within the
arbitrary limit or not, it makes sense to brake first and check
afterwards...that split second may make the difference between being
nabbed and not.

I must say, Simon, I'm rather disappointed in you if you really do
what you say in your OP. Leave the policing to the police please, as
they are trained to spot and deal with such things, and if you really
think anyone's driving dangerously, report them. That's what the
police themselves would advise you to do, not take your own brand of
vigilante action. I see dangerous and illegal behaviour quite often,
but I'd never try to force someone to stop such behaviour, or even
flash or beep at them, unless I genuinely thought that they were about
to cause an accident. Otherwise it's got nothing to do with me. This
is especially the case when it comes to an "offence" which isn't
dangerous in itself, such as exceeding the speed limit.

On May 11, 10:52*am, Toom Tabard wrote:
On 11 May, 10:45, "Simon Mason" wrote:

This works every time. A car coming towards you is obviously speeding and
you, being a responsible law abiding citizen, wish it to slow down lest it
kills someone down the road. All you do is point behind you and shout "speed
trap", then watch as they slam on their brakes and stick to the limit. Some
even thank you!

--
Simon Masonhttp://www.simonmason.karoo.net/

What's equally interesting is that, when I'm driving within the limit,
I get drivers coming the other way, flashing their lights to warn me
that there *is* a mobile camera or police check just down the road.
Some drivers apparently don't think they should co-operate with
measures to make the roads safer for them and others.

Yes, it's terrible of them to assume that you've got a pragmatic,
grown-up, non-self-righteous attitude towards speed limits and try to
help you out. I'd much rather all drivers displayed the "Up yours,
everyone else, even though I don't even know any of you" attitude that
some do: holding up long lines of cars, sitting in the wrong lane, not
indicating unless they can see a benefit to themselves, and
*definitely* not warning anyone about speed traps.

How ungrateful you are. And if you really believe that speed cameras
are designed to make the roads safer, you're incredibly gullible.
(OTOH if you're one of the car-haters who believes no such thing but
pretends to, you're much worse.)

I've never seen any Internet forum or newsgroup with as much piety.

On May 11, 11:25*am, Sir Jeremy wrote:
On 11 May, 10:52, Toom Tabard wrote:



On 11 May, 10:45, "Simon Mason" wrote:

This works every time. A car coming towards you is obviously speeding and
you, being a responsible law abiding citizen, wish it to slow down lest it
kills someone down the road. All you do is point behind you and shout "speed
trap", then watch as they slam on their brakes and stick to the limit.. Some
even thank you!

--
Simon Masonhttp://www.simonmason.karoo.net/

What's equally interesting is that, when I'm driving within the limit,
I get drivers coming the other way, flashing their lights to warn me
that there *is* a mobile camera or police check just down the road.
Some drivers apparently don't think they should co-operate with
measures to make the roads safer for them and others.

Toom

French drivers are especially good at this. Do you also object to
being overtaken? I was flashed by some woman doing 35mph in a 40mph
zone when I overtook her. Clean overtake, nothing coming, didn't cut
her up, but got the "dickhead" sign. Obviously I had to accelerate
over the speed limit to complete the overtake safely, but that's none
of her business. Interesting when I got out of the car to discuss the
matter at road works a few miles down the road she declined to engage
in conversation.

Of course she did. Such people know damn well that they don't have a
leg to stand on, and that there's nothing rational about their
objection to being overtaken: they simply like to control and impede
others, and they don't like anyone else to benefit from going faster
than them. She's hardly going to admit that.

I overtook someone at night a few weeks ago, without doing anything
remotely wrong or even breaking The Holy Speed Limit, and they decided
to leave their full beam on thereafter (it definitely wasn't a mistake
since they dipped for an oncoming car and then put it back on again).
After a minute or so I'd had enough, so I stopped my car, got out and
waited for them to catch up. Straight away, the full beam went off,
and they hung back and waited for me to get back in and go on my way.
Cowardly scum, the lot of 'em.

I really wish such parasites, who delight in holding people up and
whose attitude problem causes so much collective irritation to so many
other motorists day in day out, would be dealt with properly by the
authorities; unlike most drivers, these people have shown that they
really can't be trusted to act reasonably and actually do need robust
enforcement to be carried out against them (if you believe the car-
haters, it's the "speeders", i.e. all motorists, who are in that
category).

On May 11, 12:23*pm, spindrift wrote:
On May 11, 12:18*pm, "Simon Mason"
wrote:

"spindrift" wrote in message

....

A Safespeed supporter who recklessly and illegally overtakes and then
threatens a lone female, class!

It puzzles me as to why there are so many pro motoring lobbyists on a
cycling NG; surely they have more than enough forums of their own.

--
Simon Masonhttp://www.simonmason.karoo.net/

I don't mind them , call it the very public exposure of the kind of
mindset among the pro-speeding lobby. nuxxy and judith and the others
serve as a warning that the kind of people who demand the right to
drive as fast as they like are precisely the least suitable people to
whom this benefit ought be applied. Borderline sociopaths.

A compliment coming from you. And every time you tell a brazen lie
like "demand the right to drive as fast as they like", you show yet
again that you know perfectly well that there is no substance to your
arguments. You just keep doing it, you disingenuous little turd.

On May 11, 1:25*pm, spindrift wrote:
On May 11, 1:12*pm, Sir Jeremy wrote:

On 11 May, 12:23, spindrift wrote:

On May 11, 12:18*pm, "Simon Mason"
wrote:

"spindrift" wrote in message

I don't mind them , call it the very public exposure of the kind of
mindset among the pro-speeding lobby. nuxxy and judith and the others
serve as a warning that the kind of people who demand the right to
drive as fast as they like are precisely the least suitable people to
whom this benefit ought be applied. Borderline sociopaths.

its the only chance you get-you're banned everywhere else

I'm not banned from anywhere except cycle chat for some swearies.

Oh look, another lie.

getting banned from safespeeding or pistonheads for exposing Claire
Armstrong's lies

Oh look, another lie.

and the fact her decomposing husband insisted
donations be made to his mad old campaign group IN HIS NAME is a
public service.

Oh look, another lie.

Safespeed supporters inevitably
retreat to their nodding dog forum

Oh look, another lie.

populated by weirdoe

Oh look, another lie.

pretending to be police men.

Oh look, another lie.

Confronted with a sensible counter argument, they ban
the poster and delete the posts!

Oh look, another lie.

You're trying very hard to outdo yourself, I'll give you that.