None of this seems to deal with what is or isn't an unreasonable speed to drive at any point of time down a road type. Speed limits seem to be more and more the maximum speed where it is safe to have an accident due to some much more stupid cause, like being incapable of thinking while driving. Hence all the controversy and argument about speed cameras.
It all seems to be about driving within a few micro MPH above what some **** has decided the lowest possible limit should be. Further proof that the whole system is badly thought out and actually does little to address the real cause of accidents.
Yes, of course, if you slow traffic to 5mph everywhere, you will almost wipe out road injuries and rests overnight. No doubt, the "pro camera" group would be totally happy with this, if the limit is 5 and you get caught doing 6 then you're breaking the law and you deserve to be done. The partnerships would advertise a mbuttive acheivement. No thought for the capable drivers who have busy schedules and can actually drive (and can avoid those who can't).
For goodness sake, let's have a return to allow just a small amount of common sense to come back into traffic enforcement. If cameras are to be used, they should either present evidence of real dangerous speed, or be set to way above some of the ludicrously low limits. Some effort MUST be put into "educating" the morons who have absolutely no idea how to negotiate a roundabout, sliproad, or even a road junction.
The mobile cameras seem to be used firstly where there is a vastly inappropriately low limit, rather than in problem areas. If I get caught by one of these, I will feel totally justified to explore every possible way to avoid the fine and points.
Looking at new CarsI am considering replacing my Sei with a new car. So I went to a local dealer to see what they had to offer. It was...
