Re: "Speeding"
"Speeding" only means exceeding the legal speed limit. It does not necessarily mean "driving too fast for safety" - which is another matter entirely.

Think of a road on which the legal limit is 30mph. In snow and fog, you could be driving at 29mph - which the law says is okay - but it could still be extremely dangerous, given the road conditions. Now think of the same road on a clear, dry day, with no parked cars, on a straight stretch with no side roads in the vicinity: you can do 40mph quite safely, even though technically it's breaking the law.

This is the reason people complain about speed cameras: because the cameras (and, more basically, the speed limit) are pegged to one single nice round number all year round, which does not take into account road or weather conditions, or how fast it would actually be SAFE to drive.

In short: speed limits are a load of cack. The law should simply state a) don't drive like a twat; b) ensure that whatever speed you're doing, you have plenty of room to perform an emergency stop if some unexpected hazard emerges - for example if there are parked cars on the road, from behind which a pedestrian might conceivably be waiting to jump out, then you should slow down just in case.
(EuroSong I love horse meat: best of all the animals, Mon 5 Mar 2012, 10:52, 2 replies)

Yes, this is exactly the type of thing I mean.
People who say things like that should shut the fuck up. Thank you for the example.
( scarpe We Stole Bikes, Mon 5 Mar 2012, 10:54, closed)

Umm...
So what are you saying?

There are two types of people:

A) People who drive blindly at the speed limit, just because it's legal, and have no other regard for actual road safety?

B) People who use their brains to judge what is a safe driving speed, taking into account the amount of other traffic on the road, how wide the road is, how straight the road is, how many parked cars there are, whether it's raining or snowing, whether it's night or day, how good their car's brakes are, and how much experience they've had with that particular car's handling.

I am a person B. What are you saying - that you're a person A, who drives at 29mph on a snowy foggy night round a bend with parked cars - and who's okay with it just because it's legal?

Just because some local councillor has decided what speed limit there should be on a road, that does not bear any relation to what the ACTUAL safe speed is to drive on that stretch of road at any one time - when you consider all the factors listed above.
(EuroSong I love horse meat: best of all the animals, Mon 5 Mar 2012, 12:24, closed)

This is excellent material

( Michael Ellis contributes nothing, Mon 5 Mar 2012, 12:28, closed)

Two types of people?
There are thousands, you racist.
( number5 has been fighting tramps and losing., Mon 5 Mar 2012, 12:40, closed)

LOL

(EuroSong I love horse meat: best of all the animals, Mon 5 Mar 2012, 17:26, closed)

You're an idiot aren't you?
Where do I say that I drive AT the speed limit regardless of the situation?

Can you point it out to me, because I can't find it?
( scarpe We Stole Bikes, Mon 5 Mar 2012, 13:18, closed)

I suggest you read my post
I said "What are you saying - that you're a person A, who drives at 29mph on a snowy foggy night round a bend with parked cars - and who's okay with it just because it's legal?"

You will notice that that sentence is a question, where I asked you if you were saying you're person A. It was rhetorical. I never stated myself that you were. Therefore when you replied to me "Where do I say that I drive AT the speed limit regardless of the situation?", you implication that I had stated that you were person A is erroneous.

Anyway - you call me an idiot? On what grounds? I smell an ad hominem argument from you here.

Back to the point. Speed limits are nice round numbers set by local councils, and they have no direct physical relation to the speed it might be safe to drive at, given a particular set of variables. If you disagree with this statement then please provide either evidence, or a coherent argument to support your position. Otherwise, calling me an "idiot" does not foster respect.
(EuroSong I love horse meat: best of all the animals, Mon 5 Mar 2012, 17:25, closed)

Luckily I wasn't trying to foster your respect.
But you ask on what grounds I call you an idiot? I have a pretty foolproof method for working it out as it happens. I let someone talk. Then I decide if they are an idiot.

I don't have a position on your statement, it's your statement, I didn't raise the question. I said that if you get punished for breaking the speed limit, shut the fuck up and don't bitch about it. I made no comment on whether the speed limit was correct in the first place, because it's utterly irrelevent to my point which, to bring us back to where I started, is that I wish people like you would shut the fuck up.

I'd be politer about it, but given that that was my point before you waded in, there seems litlle point in backtracking now.
( scarpe We Stole Bikes, Mon 5 Mar 2012, 17:28, closed)

Yet again
"If you disagree with this statement then please provide either evidence, or a coherent argument to support your position."

You have failed to do this. I will therefore not bother replying further, unless you can come up with some actual argument which makes sense.

(Aha - just saw your edit)

OK - regarding your post here, I think this spat is largely the result of a misunderstanding (correct me if I'm wrong). You are quite correct, you made no comment on whether you believed that the speed limit was right in the first place - therefore if you believed that I believed you did, then it's evident that you took my original reply to your post as a disagreement. In fact, my original reply was not disagreement pre se with your OP - it was just a continuation of the discussion in a wider context.

Anyway - regarding "bitching about speeding tickets", it may surprise you to learn that I largely agree: if you got a speeding ticket, then whatever you believe about the merits or not of that particular limit, the fact remains that you were exceeding the limit and you were not careful in that you got caught by a camera or a police speed trap. The police are merely doing their job after all. Moaning about it won't change it.
(EuroSong I love horse meat: best of all the animals, Mon 5 Mar 2012, 17:31, closed)

<--------Daily Mail

( P-MONKE We're all fucked, Mon 5 Mar 2012, 13:45, closed)

I've heard a lot of people saying "I drive better when I've had a drink or two" - they should totally change that law along the same lines as you propose for the speeding one.

Something like "dont drink and drive if you feel that you might fuck up and kill someone" would work.

Seriously - do you NEED a law to tell you not to drive like a twat?
(Freakmandu, Mon 5 Mar 2012, 11:12, closed)

You shouldn't need one, but unfortunately so many people are twats
People who use their mobile phones while driving: complete idiots. Yes I know it still happens despite there being a law against it, but at least awareness of the issue has been raised so people think twice about it. Just like when seatbelt laws were introduced. Nowadays only the most irresponsible, and MOST stupid people don't wear their seatbelts. Hopefully some day in the future it will be the same with people who have one hand holding a mobile to their ear while driving - which I see on an almost daily basis.
(EuroSong I love horse meat: best of all the animals, Mon 5 Mar 2012, 12:27, closed)

Yes but what about wide roads with no traffic or pedestrians?
If I drive at 10 mph there's no reason why I can't use my mobile and drive.
( Michael Ellis contributes nothing, Mon 5 Mar 2012, 12:30, closed)

10mph forwards or in reverse?

( number5 has been fighting tramps and losing., Mon 5 Mar 2012, 12:41, closed)

Are you just trolling? :)
If not, then the reply is: if you drive at 10mph while using your mobile phone, then you're in the fucking way of other people who are actually interested in their fucking JOURNEY and want to get somewhere. So if you're more interested in your phone call then you should pull over to the side of the road and talk to your heart's content, therefore allowing other drivers to actually get to where they want to be.

Of if you're trolling - pretty funny :)
(EuroSong I love horse meat: best of all the animals, Mon 5 Mar 2012, 17:18, closed)

I can't believe YOU are asking if THEY are trolling.
I came to the comclusion that I had been trolled by you. If not, my idiot assessment is bang on.
( scarpe We Stole Bikes, Mon 5 Mar 2012, 17:22, closed)

Wtf??
Trolling is when a person deliberately and knowingly makes a blatantly ridiculous argument, but with enough insult contained within to evoke a reaction. As far as I know. How on Earth can you construe my posts as such?

Shanme, scarpe. I have been reading your own posts on and off for a while now and I thought you were intelligent and sensible. Please do not prove me wrong now. If you disagree with me then I suggest you provide logical reasons why, and I will listen. Calling me names does not do you credit.
(EuroSong I love horse meat: best of all the animals, Mon 5 Mar 2012, 17:29, closed)

I don't believe for a second you have been reading my posts
if you thought I was intelligent and sensible.

INTERNET LIES!
( scarpe We Stole Bikes, Mon 5 Mar 2012, 17:37, closed)

:)

(EuroSong I love horse meat: best of all the animals, Mon 5 Mar 2012, 19:18, closed)

What part of no traffic is giving you trouble?
Incidentally, you're an idiot.
( Spunk Murphy Tchaikovsky is a synonym for fanny, apparently, Tue 6 Mar 2012, 10:50, closed)