I thought it was road safety....
http://www.information-britain.co.uk/famdates.php?id=280
The article goes on to repeat the claim that testing the AC Daytona was also a factor.
Would You Take Driving Points For Someone Else?
- Thread starter andyandy
- Start date
I thought it was road safety....
http://www.information-britain.co.uk/famdates.php?id=280
The article goes on to repeat the claim that testing the AC Daytona was also a factor.
Rolfe
Adult human female
I'm thinking of something that was done at the time of an oil crisis, and I sort of think it was later than 1965. Were there two initiatives at different times?
In Germany, they have different speed limits depending on the weather conditions. It seems bonkers to limit people in broad daylight to a speed that is designed to be safe in thick fog. (Not that 70 is safe in thick fog, but you know what I mean.)
Rolfe.
In Germany, they have different speed limits depending on the weather conditions. It seems bonkers to limit people in broad daylight to a speed that is designed to be safe in thick fog. (Not that 70 is safe in thick fog, but you know what I mean.)
Rolfe.
Rat
Not bored. Never bored.,
I believe that the 55 limit introduced across the US was because of the oil crisis, but I could be wrong.
You're quite right....
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Road_speed_limits_in_the_United_Kingdom#1973_oil_crisis
Rolfe
Adult human female
Ah, I was conflating two different things. Thank you for the clarification.
Rolfe.
Rolfe.
anglolawyer
Banned
The jury is out in Vicky Pryce's trial. Verdict today probably.
CORed
Penultimate Amazing
The thing is, I don't know how it works in the UK, but here we have a lot of frankly terrible drivers. These folks apparently learned to drive by watching Nascar on television, and think that two car lengths at 35 mph is adequate following distance. They also drive the same way whether it is daylight, night time, or a driving rain!
There should be some kind of driving course mandatory, not just one driving test the very first time and a written exam that could be passed by an 8th grader with one quick read of the manual 10 minutes before they took it. Not to sound paranoid here, but cars are big bullets with windows in them! Even a low-speed collision can cause considerable harm, both to vehicles and, especially, to pedestrians.
I live a block from an elementary school, and despite the flashing yellow lights and the multiple warning signs, people speed down the road past the kids, sometimes PASSING other vehicles IN FRONT of the school. I'd totally support having a traffic camera installed at the school, somebody is going to get hurt. Probably a kid who is guilty of nothing more than walking along the side of the road towards home when school lets out.
Agree that dangerous driving is a bigger deal than just speeding, but in my experience even pretty smart people don't understand how speed limits are set. It's not about how fast you can go on the road without losing control--it's about how far ahead you can reasonably see, to be able to stop in time. Thus roads with more cross streets and driveways, more curves, or more vegetation along them, have lower speed limits.
I have never been in such a hurry that speeding was worth being unsafe. I think if people actually experienced how long it takes to stop a vehicle at different speeds, it might help improve their driving. Ditto for teaching a "seconds following" approach rather than car-lengths or distances, which are hard to estimate. Leave three seconds at least, from when the rear bumper of the car ahead of you passes to when your reach, a landmark; lengthen that out to five on the freeway.
There should be some kind of driving course mandatory, not just one driving test the very first time and a written exam that could be passed by an 8th grader with one quick read of the manual 10 minutes before they took it. Not to sound paranoid here, but cars are big bullets with windows in them! Even a low-speed collision can cause considerable harm, both to vehicles and, especially, to pedestrians.
I live a block from an elementary school, and despite the flashing yellow lights and the multiple warning signs, people speed down the road past the kids, sometimes PASSING other vehicles IN FRONT of the school. I'd totally support having a traffic camera installed at the school, somebody is going to get hurt. Probably a kid who is guilty of nothing more than walking along the side of the road towards home when school lets out.
Agree that dangerous driving is a bigger deal than just speeding, but in my experience even pretty smart people don't understand how speed limits are set. It's not about how fast you can go on the road without losing control--it's about how far ahead you can reasonably see, to be able to stop in time. Thus roads with more cross streets and driveways, more curves, or more vegetation along them, have lower speed limits.
I have never been in such a hurry that speeding was worth being unsafe. I think if people actually experienced how long it takes to stop a vehicle at different speeds, it might help improve their driving. Ditto for teaching a "seconds following" approach rather than car-lengths or distances, which are hard to estimate. Leave three seconds at least, from when the rear bumper of the car ahead of you passes to when your reach, a landmark; lengthen that out to five on the freeway.
Rat
Not bored. Never bored.,
I know someone whose daughter failed the (UK) theory test three times. This is a test wherein the questions are of a standard like:
You approach a zebra crossing where a pedestrian is waiting to cross; do you:
a) speed up to get over the crossing
b) sound the horn and wave
c) stop if it is safe to do so, and allow the pedestrian to cross
d) brake hard, to stop as quickly as possible.
Now, I don't know if you, from the USA, know what a zebra crossing is, but I would be happy to wager that you can tell nonetheless what the correct answer is. I really do think that someone who fails the test twice (I'll allow once for ill-prepared people who have hangovers) should not be allowed to try again for at least five years. You can take a mock test here, so you can see that I'm not making up the standard of questions.
Rat
Not bored. Never bored.,
Of course I said that, and then went and got 5 answers wrong. But then in real life I would have revised maximum speeds for cars with trailers before I started.
ETA: My favourite in that mock test was:
As you approach a pelican crossing, the lights change to green. Elderly people are halfway across. You should:
ETA: My favourite in that mock test was:
As you approach a pelican crossing, the lights change to green. Elderly people are halfway across. You should:
- wave them to cross as quickly as possible
- rev your engine to make them hurry
- flash your lights in case they have not heard you
- wait because they will take longer to cross
Last edited:
Graham2001
Graduate Poster
- Joined
- Aug 19, 2006
- Messages
- 1,771
I know of several cases of people inadvertently taking someone elses demerit points.
The usual scenario (In Western Australia anyway) goes as follows.
1. Person A lends car to Person B.
2. Car is detected speeding by a camera, fine is issued to Person A.
3. Person A receives fine. Fails to read the section explaining that if they were not driving at the time they do not have to pay the fine but can identify who was.
4. Gives fine to Person B and says "It's yours".
5. Person B pays fine. The demerit points (Traffic Points) are then applied to the person named on the fine (Person A).
6. Person A calls police and asks how their best mate/wife/daughter/son/etc's demerit points can be taken off their licence...
The usual scenario (In Western Australia anyway) goes as follows.
1. Person A lends car to Person B.
2. Car is detected speeding by a camera, fine is issued to Person A.
3. Person A receives fine. Fails to read the section explaining that if they were not driving at the time they do not have to pay the fine but can identify who was.
4. Gives fine to Person B and says "It's yours".
5. Person B pays fine. The demerit points (Traffic Points) are then applied to the person named on the fine (Person A).
6. Person A calls police and asks how their best mate/wife/daughter/son/etc's demerit points can be taken off their licence...
anglolawyer
Banned
Rat
Not bored. Never bored.,
I think the problem genuinely is that people answer what they actually do, rather than what they're meant to do.
I came across a better one later, in which the question is along the lines of "You've had an argument and are feeling tense. Before driving, you should:" and one of the answers is "have an alcoholic drink to calm down before driving". I'd love to know what percentage tick that.
anglolawyer
Banned
Well, where's the verdict? If the jury retired on Thursday they've had more than two full days. There is no way this case requires two days of deliberation. Therefore, something's up. I wonder whether the defence has made an application of some kind, perhaps based on some of the reporting. The Sunday Times ran a pretty risky article on the case and the other papers may have done likewise, or even gone further. That would give the defence a chance to aim a total knock-out blow saying she can never get a fair trial.
For the Americans, we Brits are extremely sensitive and restrictive about what can be reported before and during a trial.
For the Americans, we Brits are extremely sensitive and restrictive about what can be reported before and during a trial.
SezMe
post-pre-born
Yikes! That's more than my semi-annual premium.
SezMe
post-pre-born
I'll do this from memory because it's not worth consulting Prof. Google.
In San Diego, California, cameras were installed to catch drivers going through red lights. But the cameras were owned and operated by private companies who got a slice of the action. The system was gamed in at least a couple of ways. One was to shorten the length of the period of the yellow light. So drivers who were used to the older period got caught. Apparently the private companies were making a lot of money.
Anyway, it got messy and I think the system is no longer used. As usual, there were also unintended consequences. Drives who knew an intersection was under camera would slam on their brakes to avoid being nabbed so the rate of rear-end accidents actually went up.
SezMe
post-pre-born
In California at least (driving laws here are by state), it is just as idiotic. When I moved to the state I had to take a written test. At the DMV, I was offered the driving pamphlet but said I would just take the test. He was aghast, saying I couldn't just take the test right away again. I took it anyway and the answers were about as transparent as your example. I missed one question (out of 40? or 50?) that was about the meaning of some color painted on the curb.
I got my license and I could tell the guy on the other side of the counter was pissed. Made me day.
anglolawyer
Banned
Rolfe
Adult human female
It might look different to someone who sat through the entire proceedings, but from what I've seen via the reporting, I'd have gone for guilty. I didn't believe that "coercion" schtick for a minute.
Rolfe.
Rolfe.
I also have not heard all the evidence but from the snippets I have heard I would agree with you.
Maybe there are a couple of hold-outs whose opinion of Chris Huhne is so low that he must be guilty of coercion