Motorway Limit

[DavidS]

I often wonder what the 70 mph limit on British motorways achieves? Most people obey sensible laws so, as the majority ignore this one, it is resonable to assume that it is not sensible. The limit was brought in years ago because a racing driver was testing sports cars on the M1 at 200 mph. A real sledgehammer to crack a nut. It would have been more sensible to charge him with dangerous driving. If it wasn't dangerous, what was the problem? Is there any evidence that speed is dangerous? It seems to me that slow moving vehicles, particularly those that hog the middle are more dangerous. Only yesterday some arsehole on a mobile telphone driving a BMW pulled over into the outside lane just to stop me overtaking. Thats the sort of thing that needs clamping down on. Lets be truthful the 70 mph limit has nothing to do with safety. It is there to placate a bunch of limp wristed environmentalists.

[IdolDroog]

How can you ask if speed is dangerous? Its clear that it indirectly is very dangerous e.g

it takes a long time to slow down which could result in a different outcome of circumstance

smaller lapses of concentration are far more likely to make a car veer off.

in such incidences as the BMW driver you mentioned if you had been doing another 20mph it mightve killed you both

and all the other things you no doubt already know. To say that the speed limit is not sensible through that logic is lacking to me because if it means just one driver in an entire year drives below 70mph then its gotta be sensible because the fact is anything over 70mph is not really as safe as everyone would like to believe it is. I get a bit cautious about 70mph partly due to fuel consumption but mainly because cars just arent as trustworthy as people take them to be. I know of SEVERAL close friends and family who have had brakes fail and at 80mph wouldve had a different outcome.

I shouldnt pretend im a saint though, I keep to the normal 30s and 40s but on bi-passes im usually over 60 so itd be hypocritical to say anything really but the old chestnut about "speed doesnt kill, incompetent driving kills" is only partly true in the lower speed limit zones but its different completely in the 60+ IMHO.

[DavidS]

I understand the point you are making, but how often have you overtaken someone sticking rigidly to the 70 limit, often in the middle lane, only to come across a hazard, e.g. fog, torrential rain, 50 limit for roadworks, slow down and then be overtaken again by the same car travelling still at 70 mph? It is that type of driver who is really dangerous, not the competent one travelling above the limit in suitable conditions. Is not also daftness in the extreme that motorway driving does not form part of the driving test?

[Peter]

"It would have been more sensible to charge him with dangerous driving. If it wasn't dangerous,......"

Driving over the speed limit is an absolute offence, ie you did it or you didn't, wheras dangerous driving is subjective, and open to question. This is what allows you to be deemed "dangerous" if you use a phone whilst driving, but allows the coppers to use their radios and be safe. They'll always take the easy option and make the charge speeding to avoid having to do any work.

"Inappropriate" speed is the real problem.

[IdolDroog]

We have no motorways in Norfolk so thatd be a bit tricky here but we do dual carriageway which isnt really all that different

Again what you said is true - driving relevant to the conditions. Many obviously dont and thats why they skid off, go through tyres faster than the rest of us, use more petrol and prob burn out brakes a lot faster

[IdolDroog]

The fact you can still legally play about with your radio/cd player or smoke whilst driving baffles me. Although I can remember as a kid 10 years ago or so there were a LOT more drivers smoking and driving at the same time...much rarer to see it now.

[DavidS]

I agree, but when racing cars were being tested on the M1 there was no limit. It was introduced to stop it. The problem you mention is not so much a reluctance by the police to put pen to paper, it is dickhead lay magistrates who have no understanding of the evidence put before them. There should be an offence of inappropriate speed.

[DavidS]

OK IdolDroog. Perhaps before anyone is allowed to adjust there radio or smoke while driving they should have to pass the Lyndon Johnson test for coordination. Whether the could fart and chew gum at the same time! Seriously though, the point you make is a valid one.

[IdolDroog]

what do you call innappropriate though? Thus the problem

[IdolDroog]

Another thought ive been having David is that if there were no limit people like your BMW friend would have a field day! There would be cars regularly going well over 100mph, a speed I personally feel most drivers arent really competent enough to control well. I think 80 is q. a nice speed on big open roads, but then in the right car you can comfortably go 90 without noticing. But its all so dependant on how many other cars there are on the road, if there are very few and someone wants to go 100 they would have to stay in the middle or outside lane to avoid rear ending someone.

Just in case you hadnt realised but I havent driven motorways much and as such am basing my opinions on the perspective of a normal road driver, motorway passenger and general common sense rather than any experience.

Still dont see why we cant have the 5s back in the UK speed limits....25 is a much more reasonable speed 35,45,55,65 on A roads, and then 75 on motorways....