Speed

[Brigadier]

Is your position that we should not have any speed limits on any roads, or is that not your position?

I already told you "Yes, based on risk". Which is a Yes.

 

[Brigadier]

What do you think should be done about people who drive a a higher speed than is appropriate?

Something, otherwise it is not a "limit".

 

[ban-all-sheds]

So if the limit is not signposted, what legal processes do you think there could be to do "something" about people who exceed the limit?

And if there are to be limits, signposted or not, do you object to the use of technology to enforce the limits, and/or to detect those who exceed them?

 

[Brigadier]

So if the limit is not signposted, what legal processes do you think there could be to do "something" about people who exceed the limit?

Completely out-of-context; I was stating my opinion regarding driver ability, not legality. A hypothetical number posted on a stick is not the be-all-and-end-all of "safe" driving.

And if there are to be limits, signposted or not, do you object to the use of technology to enforce the limits, and/or to detect those who exceed them?

Breaking with the tradition of some on here, I'll give a direct answer; No.

 

[EFLImpudence]

If people need a sign to tell them what speed is appropriate, should they even be driving at all?

A very good point.

IF everyone was a very good driver, then there would be no need for speed limits.

Is your position that we should not have any speed limits on any roads, or is that not your position?

Not really an appropriate response in view of what was said, is it?

 

[durhamplumber]

failed to look? drunk? drugged? defective vehicle? jumped a red? All vastly more likely to cause an accident.

And all more likely to be accompanied by speeding ..Again....which excuse you going to accept when its your loved on a slab?

 

[durhamplumber]

There was some analysis that showed men and women aren't so different when you look at miles driven. Women still drive significantly fewer miles than men - exposure time is a certain factor in risk.

That is not to say - young men aren't a higher risk than girls. testosterone and cortisol both impact the function of the brain, particularly the amygdala

"The need for speed" syndrome..makes them incapable of reading a sign,,,reading a speedo,,,taking foot of accelerator,braking,keeping safe distance,,not red lining rev counter at every opportunity..

 

[ban-all-sheds]

A very good point.

IF everyone was a very good driver, then there would be no need for speed limits.

Even in that scenario, how could you have any workable legal regime to deal with people who, no matter how "good" they were (or thought they were), drove faster than "everybody else" thought was appropriate?

And how would you deal with the need to regulate the speed of traffic for flow management reasons before actual congestion-induced bunching and slow-downs begin? Or because of an accident or roadworks or etc ahead which no driver, no matter how good he was, could be able to see until it was too late to slow at a sensible rate?

Not really an appropriate response in view of what was said, is it?

It didn't start out as a response to anything in particular - it was just a question. I wanted to see if anybody was opposed to the idea of there being any speed limits on any roads.

 

[EFLImpudence]

Even in that scenario, how could you have any workable legal regime to deal with people who, no matter how "good" they were "or thought they were", drove faster than "everybody else" thought was appropriate?

Well, you have introduced "or thought they were" which implies they are mistaken, therefore not very good drivers, so irrelevant.
Obviously, everyone driving to their abilities would result in the impossible result in traffic of everyone driving at different speeds.
Why would you need a workable legal regime if everyone was driving perfectly?

And how would you deal with the need to regulate the speed of traffic for flow management reasons before actual congestion-induced bunching and slow-downs begin? Or because of an accident or roadworks or etc ahead which no driver, no matter how good he was, could be able to see until it was too late to slow at a sensible rate?

An entirely different matter so also irrelevant.

It didn't start out as a response to anything in particular

You quoted Brigadier's post therefore it was a response.
You could have asked the question in isolation.

- it was just a question. I wanted to see if anybody was opposed to the idea of there being any speed limits on any roads.

Then you may as well have asked him if he was opposed to cars.



I am tempted to say that you have become 'not very good at this'.

 

[Ian H]

I am tempted to say that you have become 'not very good at this'.

I wish you and your fellow travellers would get it right. It’s:

“You’re not very good at this, are you.”

 

[ban-all-sheds]

Well, you have introduced "or thought they were" which implies they are mistaken, therefore not very good drivers, so irrelevant.

Only irrelevant in the world of pedantic t**ts.

Very relevant in the real world.

Obviously, everyone driving to their abilities would result in the impossible result in traffic of everyone driving at different speeds.
Why would you need a workable legal regime if everyone was driving perfectly?

How would it be determined if someone was driving perfectly?

An entirely different matter so also irrelevant.

No - not irrelevant - situations where there is a need for people to limit their speed to below that which they are "capable" of driving at.

You quoted Brigadier's post therefore it was a response.
You could have asked the question in isolation.

I'd asked it several times.

So as it seems by "response" you mean "prompted by the fact that Brigadier posted", then yes, it was in response. It was prompted not by what he posted , but by the fact that he posted. And perfectly valid.

Then you may as well have asked him if he was opposed to cars.

Why? Are being opposed to cars and being opposed to speed limits congruent?

I am tempted to say that you have become 'not very good at this'.

Before you do, you should stand in front of a mirror and say it to your reflection.

 

[SammyInnit]

I wish you and your fellow travellers would get it right. It’s:

“You’re not very good at this, are you.”

 

[EFLImpudence]

Only irrelevant in the world of pedantic t**ts.

Please show me a Wikipedia definition of "pedantic t**ts" which indicates that it is not meant to be an unnecessary rude objectionable derogatory term made just because that is what cannot resist doing.

 

[motorbiking]

Even in that scenario, how could you have any workable legal regime to deal with people who, no matter how "good" they were (or thought they were), drove faster than "everybody else" thought was appropriate?

People who drive faster, perhaps those who represent the fastest 15% or 20% of drivers? Working on the basis that 80-85% choose a safe speed? There is good evidence that the risks of accident increase for the top 10-15% of speed on a given road.

And how would you deal with the need to regulate the speed of traffic for flow management reasons before actual congestion-induced bunching and slow-downs begin? Or because of an accident or roadworks or etc ahead which no driver, no matter how good he was, could be able to see until it was too late to slow at a sensible rate?

How about - warning accident ahead or reduce speed due to congestion? There is good evidence to suggest people are more likely to slow down for hazard alerts than temporary speed limits, particularly when they don't understand why there is a temporary limit in place?

 

[motorbiking]

And all more likely to be accompanied by speeding ..Again....which excuse you going to accept when its your loved on a slab?

I'm not entirely sure you understand the difference between speeding (speed above the posted limit) and driving too fast (a speed that does not enable you to stop safely in the distance you can see to be clear).