"Two speeding strikes and your banned" New excessive speeding penalties UK

Run_to_da_hills

The UK is considering a two step penalty system for speeding. In excessive of 20MPH over the limit incurs six points and under that it incurs the normal three. Like Ireland your off the road at twelve.

This will be fun for us when they get a fine/points sharing system in place between the North, UK and here.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2008/nov/20/driving-offences-speeding

SV

Harse but..fair enough I guess.

unkel

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

In excessive of 20MPH over the limit incurs six points

Pathetic if that applies to motorway driving. Motorway driving is genenerally very very safe even if there are some people driving at 250km/h or more on an open stretch.

Why are governments wasting all this money on campaigns that have no benefit to society whatsoever?

I'd much rather they concentrate and make sure we never see those "the defendant had 54 previous convictions" comments again in murder or rape trials (sorry for rant)

L1011

Sky News's coverage of this definately suggested that it would be two strikes of 90 on motorways.

I've been overtaken by entire streams of traffic while doing 90 on a UK motorway. The entire country would be banned in a week if that was enforced heavily!

ninty9er

I'm continuing my campaign to have the speed limit increased to 160 on our motorways and 140 on DC.

This is a load of bull. 20 mph above in a 30 mph zone should be an immediate ban if it's built up/residential.

SV

ninty9er wrote: »

I'm continuing my campaign to have the speed limit increased to 160 on our motorways and 140 on DC.

tbh, I wouldn't trust half the people on the roads to do that speed.

Alanstrainor

ninty9er wrote: »

I'm continuing my campaign to have the speed limit increased to 160 on our motorways and 140 on DC.

Considering the fact that there is no motorway driving covered in the Irish driving test, to suggest that once you've proved yourself to be competent "around town" so to speak, to be then let off at 160Km/h is just insanity. Imho, it's bad enough as it is at 120.

Run_to_da_hills

unkel wrote: »

Pathetic if that applies to motorway driving. Motorway driving is genenerally very very safe even if there are some people driving at 250km/h or more on an open stretch.

Why are governments wasting all this money on campaigns that have no benefit to society whatsoever?

I'd much rather they concentrate and make sure we never see those "the defendant had 54 previous convictions" comments again in murder or rape trials (sorry for rant)

Im sure its everywhere, the UK is a minefield of Gatsos, You will either have a good lot of motorists off the road or a nation of Sunday drivers.

If this goes through, the UK will be a cheap place to get a nice sports bike.

eringobragh

ClioV6 wrote: »

tbh, I wouldn't trust half the people on the roads to do that speed.

Agreed Although I often do that on my local motorway where possiblem your campaign is a waste of time. I shudder to imagine some of the daily drivers I encounter travelling at that speed.

VanhireBoys

Dont fret boys - we have diplomatic immunity from prosecution due to our Irish licences.....! Its too much paperwork for the UK feds to prosecute an Irish driver....!

We took an '89 XJ6 from Blighty and we were late for the boat. We got flashed about 7 times by Gatsos. We got 3 tickets... We sent in the details of who was driving and heard nowt since.....!

Blitzkrieger

ninty9er wrote: »

This is a load of bull. 20 mph above in a 30 mph zone should be an immediate ban if it's built up/residential.

I'd broadly agree but I'd narrow the zones more. There's some 30mph and 40mph zones that are a joke - the Lower Glanmire Road inbound in Cork for example. I know where I live there's tons of people who stick to 50mph after coming off the dual carraigeway when 70 would be safe, then continue at 50mph through the middle of the town when I've slowed down to 30. Police in London had a campaign going for a while where they were targeting people around schools at the start and end of the school day. I thought that was a great idea.

Highsider

Bad driving kills not speed. Dont matter anyhow as all cars and motorbikes will have speed limiters or speed detection units fitted before long anyways. The nanny state in full flow again:mad:

AugustusMaximus

Absolutely ridiculous.

While the Labour government has been good for us and NI, it is absolutely destroying the Uk. The UK is quickly turning into the worst nanny state in the world.

cyclopath2001

Highsider wrote: »

Bad driving kills not speed.

It may be that bad driving is responsible for most accidents, but what kills people is the speed of the collision.

ninty9er

cyclopath2001 wrote: »

It may be that bad driving is responsible for most accidents, but what kills people is the speed of the collision.

I think it's the impact, which varies according to whether

a) The car is 3 tonnes or half a tonne.
b) The occupants are belted in correctly
c) The speed is adaquate
d) The road surface is wet or dry
e) The tyres and brakes (stopping distance) are capable

The list could go on....you'll note that speed is only one factor;)

Steve

unkel wrote: »

I'd much rather they concentrate and make sure we never see those "the defendant had 54 previous convictions" comments again in murder or rape trials (sorry for rant)

Absolutely, just like that guy who killed the two old ladies while pissed out of his head having just bought a lexus. He had lots of previous convictions, some involving joyriding and stolen cars, why wasn't he in jail? If he was then it could have prevented these deaths.

What's the solution? Let's put up more cameras, that'll stop them all..:rolleyes:

Blitzkrieger

AugustusMaximus wrote: »

While the Labour government has been good for us

What? "Government" and "good for us" doesn't really compute...

old boy

ClioV6 wrote: »

tbh, I wouldn't trust half the people on the roads to do that speed.

hear hear, i was passed out yesterday by a female driver in a 90 fiesta i was doing 105 f.f.s. also she had the usual fag in the hand, i dread to think of the results if her mobile went off

old boy

SteveC wrote: »

Absolutely, just like that guy who killed the two old ladies while pissed out of his head having just bought a lexus. He had lots of previous convictions, some involving joyriding and stolen cars, why wasn't he in jail? If he was then it could have prevented these deaths.

What's the solution? Let's put up more cameras, that'll stop them all..:rolleyes:

i remember a time when you could not drive your new purchase from the dealer without the dealer having conformation that it was insured, now all you need a deposit on the car

Guy:Incognito

2 threads with the same content, who'da thunk it would be the one started by RTDH that would have the more sensational title.

Run_to_da_hills

AugustusMaximus wrote: »

Absolutely ridiculous.

While the Labour government has been good for us and NI, it is absolutely destroying the Uk. The UK is quickly turning into the worst nanny state in the world.

And what about Ireland?

Ay least you can get to the offie after 10Pm and enjoy a nght out with out having to be tucked into bed at 2.30.am. :pac:

ardmacha

A certain penalty for a fixed x mph over a limit is silly. It should be percentage based, so 10kph over a 40kph limit would be treated the same as 30kph over a 120kph limit.

AugustusMaximus

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

And what about Ireland?

Ay least you can get to the offie after 10Pm and enjoy a nght out with out having to be tucked into bed at 2.30.am. :pac:

Should have said "not bad for ireland", especially in comparison to most Tory governments.

cyclopath2001

ninty9er wrote: »

The list could go on....you'll note that speed is only one factor;)

True, but we've had incidences here of people misinterpreting statistics about the cause of accidents and erroneously stating that 'speed only a factor in 12% of accidents' and then going on to rubbish attempts to enforce speed limits based on this faulty reasoning.

Speed is always a factor and possibly, it's the most influential.

Steve

cyclopath2001 wrote: »

Speed is always a factor and possibly, it's the most influential.

Really? :eek:

I'm off to get pissed drunk and smoke a few spliffs later. Don't worry though, I'll drive home slowly with the lights off and I'll call you on the mobile to let you know how I'm getting on. I'll be fine right? as long as I don't speed..:)

cyclopath2001

SteveC wrote: »

Really? :eek:

I'm off to get pissed drunk and smoke a few spliffs later. Don't worry though, I'll drive home slowly with the lights off and I'll call you on the mobile to let you know how I'm getting on. I'll be fine right? as long as I don't speed..:)

Ok then: let me rephrase that more clearly: "The speed at which a vehicle is traveling is always a factor in the amount of damage or injury that occurs when there is a collision."

maidhc

cyclopath2001 wrote: »

True, but we've had incidences here of people misinterpreting statistics about the cause of accidents and erroneously stating that 'speed only a factor in 12% of accidents' and then going on to rubbish attempts to enforce speed limits based on this faulty reasoning.

Speed is always a factor and possibly, it's the most influential.

I sort of agree with you, loath as I am to say it. If you drive too fast on some roads, especialy regional or secondary roads your chances of meeting an unfortunate demise increase dramatically.

However exactly what a safe speed on such roads in impossible to judge, it may be 20mph, or it may be 50mph. It may be legal to do 50mph around a hairpin, but equally suicidal. This should not be confused with "speeding" and connotations with speed cameras. It requires training and common sense, so while "excessive speed" may well be the cause of the accident, it is more a symptom than disease.

cyclopath2001

maidhc wrote: »

I sort of agree with you, loath as I am to say it. If you drive too fast on some roads, especialy regional or secondary roads your chances of meeting an unfortunate demise increase dramatically.

The mistake many drivers are making is to assume that their driving ability and the quality of the road are the only factors that decide what a safe speed should be.

Steve

cyclopath2001 wrote: »

Ok then: let me rephrase that more clearly: "The speed at which a vehicle is traveling is always a factor in the amount of damage or injury that occurs when there is a collision."

I don't disagree with that, it's basic physics. Of course more speed = more damage.
However you said earlier, as usual, that speed was a cause. Speed doesn't cause accidents, stupidity and bad driving does (mostly).

cyclopath2001

SteveC wrote: »

I don't disagree with that, it's basic physics. Of course more speed = more damage.
However you said earlier, as usual, that speed was a cause. Speed doesn't cause accidents, stupidity and bad driving does (mostly).

You have misunderstood.

We're actually referring the same thing in different ways - unsafe speed as a result of poor judgment, bad driving, stupidity, excessive confidence, aggression, or whatever.... causing a loss of control or failure to stop in time.

Steve

Fair enough, cyclopath. I agree with that.