How many crashes are caused by speeding drivers is irrelevant to being cited for operating in excess of the speed limit. This would fall under the "no harm, no foul" fallacy.
Irrelevant to the issue. One behavior being more damaging than another behavior does not mitigate the first behavior.
Because there are so many speeders? I don't know, I don't live in the UK.
Paul Smith seems to be an exceptional idiot. The government needs no case other than "we have concluded this law is best and it *is* the law".
More like spinning an argument that persons who violate the law should go unpunished.
Seems reasonable to me.
Yeah, it's always "the other guy" that LE should be concentrating their efforts toward and those efforts should always be the most inefficient and least likely to catch "me".
It seems that drivers who operate in excess of the SL in the midst of a traffic camera-ridden country ain't all that smart to begin with. It seems unlikely they will conclude that the need for the cameras came second.
If driving too fast for conditions isn't considered "driver error", to whom or what should the error be attributed?!
People drive like morons so I fail to see any alternate solution. -----
- gpsman
