to presume NO ONE speeds ever on mn

[Jedward]

or at least admits to it.

KOH is correct when she says you should drive to the conditions. I had a horrible accident where I spun the car right around on ice. The speed limit was 60 and I was only driving at 40. I was a new, inexperienced driver. These days I tip-toe at 25 on ice.

WHO has said that obeying the speed limit makes you immune?
and how many fatalities in your five mph rear ender?

you are nuts to drive on ice under any conditions.

yes - i agreed it is nuts to drive on ice... but I have job that i'm expected to turn up to, even in winter.

How many fatalities in my 5 mph rear ender? At that time, none. Had it happened 2 months later when I was pregnant with dc2, it would most likely have resulted in a miscarriage (especially baring in mind I am a rhesus negative blood type and therefore particularly vulnerable to miscarriage). The driver wasn't to know that (why would he?) - he just wasn't paying attention and drove off immediately.

It doesn't matter the speed of an accident and you don't always know the consequences for someone else.

i doubt anyone has any objections whatsoever to driving to the conditions, so long as they're not breaking the law by going over the speed limit. but yes, you are nuts.

me

i'm a tragic speed hound

I have the need for speed
DP drives like an old man and it drives me insane.

none, then, koh. that's good.

you are the one arguing for people to be able to drive faster than the speed limit, yes? how will this prevent other road users from losing concentration and careening into you at 80mph, potentially causing a major pile up?

i fundamentally don't get your point here. how would your rhesus + pregnant body have looked after a crash at 80mph?

no one is assuming immunity from accident at slower speeds, but there is huuuuuuuuge evidence of fewer fatalities. this is a good thing, surely?

my dh also like driving miss daisy
cannot bear to be driven anywhere by him
i do the driving if we go anywhere together as his dithering and snail coach winds me to breaking point

"you are the one arguing for people to be able to drive faster than the speed limit, yes?"

Not at all. I am arguing for the speed limits to be set at reasonable levels so that sensible driving is not classified as speeding. eg there is quite often a 20 mph limit near schools. I have no problem with that at 8:45 or 3:15 and drive like a (very alert) snail. But why does that limit still need to be in force at, say, midnight when all the kids are tucked up in bed?

I "speed", if you call it "speeding" to go 80 km/hr on a highway.

When I first moved to this part of the world, speed limits on the highway were 110 km/hr and 90 km/hr at certain places, and I made a real effort to obey those rules.

Then they decreased speed limits to 90 km/hr and 70 km/hr at certain places. I don't drive a bicycle and it's stupid to go at 70 km/hr on a highway, so now I don't much mind the speed limits and go at whatever speed strikes my fancy at the time. Which tends to be way over the limit.

Knackered, your assertion to drive according to the conditions of the road is absolutely correct of course. BUT, it should be within the speed limits. I just don't get where people think, "oh speed limit. Ah well, that doesn't apply to me obviously as I am a truly fab driver".

God I speed on motorways yes

Well I certainly did last night, in fact I think I probaby expecting tickets from Hampshire/Wiltshire/Essex constabulary soonest.

The one person doing 70 on the M3 last night was causing everyone to overtake and undertake him (he was in the fast lane though)

Good idea, Riven. Because we all know that the Govt has an open mind and doesn't prejudge things - just ask Prof David Nutt and the Drugs Advisory Board.

Sherby, I think the problem with the person doing 70mph in the outside lane wasn't the fact that he was driving at 70mph, it was because he shouldn't have been in the outside lane, regardless of the the speed he was travelling, if he was not overtaking.

Perhaps if you did get caught speeding last night, instead of points you might be invited to go on a speed awareness course. That may well change your opinion of what appropriate speed is

I'm leaving this argument now because MN is running extremely slooowly and it's doing my head in: I have the need for speed.

he was probably eating a yoghurt at the time and that's what slowed him down, riv.

and it's over-taking lane...

btw fembear, you ARE arguing to be able to drive faster than the current speed limit... no need to be so opaque i think.

but until they change it for you, i really hope all you speeders get caught and fined, because your attitude makes everyone faster on the road, and that makes it more dangerous for those of us obeying the limit.

I am not arguing for people to drive FASTER than the speed limit at all. I am arguing that people should drive for the conditions of the road. Sometimes this will be considerably SLOWER than the speed limit. My point is that many people equate sticking to the speed limit as safe, but it is really not that simple. I don't want you hitting my child whilst driving at the speed limit, I want you to be alert enough to see a small child at the side of the road, realise there is a possibility he might step out and not hit him at all. Not running into people gives much fewer fatalities than hitting people slowly.

I have also NEVER thought "that doesn't apply to me because I am a truly FAB driver". I have on occassion (when driving late at night on an empty motorway) driven over the speed limit slightly (i.e. 80 or so), because conditions were such that it was not dangerous to do so. On the other hand, I will crawl around residential areas because of the risk of children playing on the road etc, whereas some people will still screech down those streets at 30 mph.

Also those doing 90 in torrential rain and poor visibility are not driving to the conditions of the road either. However, in those conditions, otoh, if they were driving at 70 (assuming it is a motorway), they probably still are not driving safely. Especially not if they are hugging the bumper of the car in front.

That is exactly my point, it is not that I want someone to drive 90 in torrential rain, but I also don't want them to drive 70 in those conditions and far too close to me. However, the speed cameras will not pick that they are driving incredibly dangerously and should be driving maybe 40 or so with at least double the normal braking distance. This is a problem which can only be addressed by better driver training in the first place though.

I think everyone has broken the speed limit at some point and I do agree with KnackeredOldHag. Most of the time the speed limit is there for a good reason and I cannot abide by those idiots who speed through a housing estate or town centre.

However those stretches of roads that are 40mph for no apparent reason really annoy me.

There's also a stretch of road near us that is 30mph for half a mile before rising to 40 again. The reason is that there is a school here, however the road is long and clear and on a Sunday night I often see the police with their mobile speed cameras at this spot and you just know they're only after your money.

Wasn't it found that if no speed limit is introduced, rather than going faster the drivers would actually go slower as they felt the responsibility more? Having a speed limit is the green light for some people to break the law, they see it as a challenge. Take that away and they actually drive according to the conditions of the road.