Speed Camera in Horse Box

[colin(bridgend)]

Thorpedo I can understand what you are saying and I agree with an advert of this nature which brings the point home to many. What I am saying is that as the vehicle is an inanimate object and is controlled by the person driving. If the driver was to respect the highway and other road users then there should not be this problem.

There is a report in today's paper of a millionaire's son driving a Range Rover at over 70 mph in a 30 mph speed limit area and causing serious injury to a baby. If he had driven according to the speed limit and the traffic flow at the time then the accident would not have happened and the baby would now be OK, as it is she is a virtual living corpse requiring 24 hour care as a resul of her injuries .

 

[giovanni_5060838]

"Speed DOES NOT kill - it is the person who is driving that kills. This can be demonstrated by the likes of Louis Hamilton and other grand prix drivers who maybe involved in crashes at speed but are very rarely killed or seriously injured."

Excellent point there colin, except on the race track the drivers are kitted out with safety features we mere mortals do not have. the track itself has protection all the way round it for added safety and the cars are all travelling in the same direction. So really its not a fair comparison with everyday driving conditions.

"speed does not kill" speed is a rate of motion [velocity]

Motion is movement Therefore if a collition takes place with enough velocity to make the impact forces terminal then it kills.

Therefore speed [volocity kills]

Don't argue the point with me,am no expert take it up with Einstien.....

 

[colin(bridgend)]

A vehicle is like a computer - garbage in gives garbage out, and by heck there is a lot of garbage being posted on this forum on times LOL. If the person were to control the speed and driving manner then there will not be the impact to kill. Any form of impact by speed, no matter the rate of speed, could kill if the right part of the body comes in contact, be it a bullet or just a falling branch off a tree for example. What I am advocating is the idiot who is performing the speed that is the lethal factor in the equation. Regarding the quote of Einstein's Theory - I taught Building Physics for twenty five yaers and this was part of the sylabus so I think I am competant in knowledge to "discuss" the matter.

 

[colin(bridgend)]

One other point of interest Gio from your posting is where you say all drivers in a GP are going the same way. In theory all drivers on the Queen's highway should be going the same way. The problem generally starts when the silly idiot driving decides to use the opposite lane in his ignorance to speed and safety in order to reach his destination quicker and with the adrenilin flowing through his body. There was also an advert on the TV a few years ago where the driver of a speeding vehicle was depicted with horns from his head and made to represent the devil.

 

[giovanni_5060838]

colin, you make a sound point there although i still don't agree,as i didnot agree with your use of GP racing to vback up your piont, but we are allowed to differ as one mans garbage is another mans wealth.

 

[colin(bridgend)]

The question that now springs to mind Gio - Who is talking garbage and who is talking wealth? LOL

 

[Colinn]

Colin, you wrote:

"If the person were to control the speed and driving manner then there will not be the impact to kill."

Precisely....

So let's not winge about speed cameras. Think of them as your guardian angels, a constant reminder to you to obey speed limits. Lives WILL be saved. The Government won't get your money...

Don't just think about it. DO IT!!

 

[colin(bridgend)]

You are spot on Colin - however I do not agree with the underhanded way the North Wales Police are now operating. In my opinion the Chief of Police of this force appears to have a vendetta against the motorist and this is what annoys me about their style of policing - easy pickings compared to the criminal side of policing.

I also do not agree with warning motorists that a speed camera is operating in the area. This will only make them drive according to the law in that area and then go like a bat out of hell to make up for lost time. There should be no advanced warnings and the camera vans should not be so conspicuous. It may appear that I am arguing against myself but until now all camera vans have been marked and all gatso cameras are visible. I don't think any other force would have even thought of using unmarked vehicles and a horse box.

Another point raised is that should police cars be back on the roads there would be less use of mobile phones, etc. whilst driving. Whether you agree with the law or not is immaterial, if the law is there then it should be obeyed.

 

[rayc]

Colin said "I also do not agree with warning motorists that a speed camera is operating in the area. This will only make them drive according to the law in that area and then go like a bat out of hell to make up for lost time".

This is not what is happening though with the vast majority of drivers. The partnerships will not produce the figures, hiding behind the data protection act, but I suspect that 80% or more prosecutions are for less than 10mph over the speed limit.

There is a case in my local paper where a guy who's wife was practically ready to deliver her baby in the car was caught whilst getting her to hospital at 5am. His speed was 38mph. This has got nothing to do with 'Speed kills' or 'remember the children'.

The figures have been released that show that the number of motorists caught fell last year for the first time in many years and that those banned under the totting up procedure also fell for the first time. Was this because drivers were sticking to thge limits or the fact that since the end of 'netting off' the Partnerships can no longer feather their nests?