To wonder how so many people are comfortable breaking the speed limit?

I skip red lights as a matter of course on most major roads. I do so safely (I have a Bikeability Level 3 and a British Cycling racing licence) and only where the circumstances are appropriate. I do most of my cycling during quieter hours on the road and my bikes are more faster than the average (I am built for speed).

In 30 years averaging 25-30k miles a day I’ve never once had a ticket, a talking to, or an accident.

Where I live the majority of people drive far too irresponsibly, are hesitant, have poor lane discipline and observation. I want those people behind me, not in front of me.

I generally drive at the speed limit where I judge it to be safe to do so. The sole exception is motorways and motorway-standard dual carriageways (with slip roads etc) where, if traffic is light, I do drive at about 80-ish. I wouldn't do this on lower standard dual carriageways where vehicles have to turn right across traffic or where traffic has to join with high speed differences though.

I do judge my speed based on my GPS, and not the car's speedometer which under-reads by a fair bit. For example, if I drive at 70mph my speedo reads about 75.

I agree with others who estimate that a 16 year old fiesta's speedo will likely read 70 when you're actually doing about 63-65 mph. In my experience the most accurate speedometers tend to be in larger premium, higher performance and especially German cars. I genuinely think this difference in speedometer accuracy plays a significant part in the reputation drivers of cars like BMWs have for being in a hurry everywhere. If a smaller/cheaper car is sitting on a national speed limit road with the speedo reading 60mph, they may well only be doing 55mph while someone in a car with a more accurate speedo is sitting frustrated behind them with their speedo reading 56-57mph, looking for a chance to overtake.

It’s small car bullying, OP. Just pull over and give them a cheery wave as they blaze past (and pray for karma)!

When people do this to me I just ease off to increase the gap in front to compensate. If they don't get the message and drop back, I think "oh well, with someone following that close I guess it's not safe to be overtaking" and slow down until I can slot back into a suitable gap in the cars I was overtaking. Of course I won't force myself into a gap that's too small, so sometimes it takes quite a long time until there is a suitable opportunity to move aside.

But one thing I won't do is be bullied into speeding up when I was travelling at a perfectly safe speed of my own choosing.

Indeed they should. I'm not disagreeing with that. But they don't. Yes they are at fault, but all advice from motoring organisations is to get out of their way as soon as you can safely.. 'As soon as you can safely' are the operative words. I suspect people are replying to this according to what they are seeing in their minds from the OP. She now says that there isn't safe room for her to move over in the scenarios she was talking about - which is fair enough. The definition of what constitutes 'a short distance' is subjective and not a specific definition

All the more reason for regular re-testing then, to actually force people to re-read and re-learn the Highway Code and take heed of changes etc.

Why? If you are overtaking a stream of traffic in lanes 1- 2- 3 etc you may well be in the 'fast lane' for quite sometime before pulling back to the left.

@Silvers11 No, the person coming up behind at over the speed limit should be slowing down.
The person in the right lane going at the speed limit should move to the left, when it's safe to do so. That may not be immediately as there might not be space.
If an accident happens because someone is "frustrated" that they can't drive at over the speed limit then that's solely their fault, they're the ones breaking the law and the Highway Code. Absolutely not the fault of the person who is driving correctly.

If I murder someone but don't get caught, have I really committed a crime? No criminal record, no further action taken.

I think you are a rarity.

And yes most people do forget stuff after they have done their test, which may be many years ago.

IIRC, when I took my test all you had to do was answer what a couple of road signs were and that was that. There was no theory test.

@GasPanic
But if you read the Highway Code before you take your driving test, surely you don't immediately forget everything you've read? Knowing speed limits and motorway discipline are pretty basic things. And yes, I woukd expect people to re-read the Highway Code from time to time. I've been driving for over 30 years and have always bought a copy when I'm aware that it's been updated and yes, I do skim through it.

I mean after passing their test how many people do you think actually read the highway code on a regular basis ?

I mean I am sure there will be someone who pops up and says they read it every week, but for most people they have other things to do with their time ?

Country roads are even worse. Overtaking on hills and blind bends because of 'frustration'. Imagine thinking a head on collision was a reasonable risk to take rather than doing 50 for a bit.

No I believe in the law and driving within the speed limit, but nope I never had time to spy on my neighbours during covid, was too busy working full time!

Just because someone doesn’t break the law themselves, doesn’t mean they spy on people, what a strange analogy.

Some of the comments on this thread are a bit scary. It seems as though a lot of people haven't ever read the Highway Code. How did they pass their driving tests when they are so ignorant of the law?

You honestly can't be serious. Twat trying to race up the outside lane at 90 tailgates law abiding overtaker doing 70, and if his anger at being held back by a slowcoach results in him driving dangerously then it's law abiders fault??

The whole point is, for speeding, you won't end up in front of a judge if you stick below the police guidelines! Unless of course you are stupid enought to be caught enough times to get 12 points. Then you really are stupid :)

I think those who vehemently belive that speed limits must never be exceeded are the saae people who spied on their neighbours during lockdown to make sure they didn't go out more than once a day ;)

Oh dear god, frustration doesn't cause accidents. It can cause independent adults to make dangerous maneuvers. The decision is entirely on them.

Speed isn't the cause of most accidents. The statistics are for "speed being a factor", not the root cause. That's a very important distinction. Most deaths are due to carelessness, incompetence, medical episodes, drunk/drugged driving, etc. The statistics are often taken out of context. Many of the deaths flagged with speed being a factor, would still have been deaths had the drivers concerned been driving at or below the speed limits!

And to make that clear, by no more to overtake I don’t mean until there are no more cars as far as the eye can see, I mean until I’m able to stay in the left lane for a sensible amount of time before I’ll need to pull out to overtake again. But if there are say 10 cars a short distance apart going slower than I am I’ll stay in the overtaking lane until I’ve passed them all, rather than ducking in and out behind each of them individually.

That depends on what is going on around you. If you have someone going faster than you in the Overtaking lane and coming up behind you, you SHOULD be moving over, if there is room to do so, to let them past and then pulling out again when you need. You don't just sit out because there is a further line of slower moving cars and you will need to pull out again.

People who drive like you can actually contribute to the cause of accidents. Yes, 70mph is the legal limit, but frustration by other drivers can cause accidents and it is best practice to consider other road users, not just be smug that you aren't going over 70mph and you'll stay where you are because it suits you. That is actually as bad driving as those who are speeding and driving up the rear of vehicles in front.

But the outcome is the same isn't it. So that's semantics. If you stay under 96mph on the motorway and, if caught, pay the fine / FPN then you will not get a criminal record. Sure, you have tecnhically commited a crime. But if you don't have a criminal record as a result, and no further action is taken, have you really commited a crime...? 😂

I'm prepared to accept "crazy" speed limits in exchange for a 15% reduction in deaths per million population.

I would love to see some posters in front of a judge.

“No no your Honour, you shouldn’t ban me from driving, I believe the law is just a guide…”

Above the law are you? Arrogant beyond belief.