7 ms·

There's the old joke: "All those present that object to receiving speeding fines please raise your right foot". People object to speeding fines but receiving t

• Traster 6y ago
  My main objection is that enforcement, at least in the UK is absolutely useless. The likelihood of actually coming across a speed trap is tiny, the likelihood of coming across a speed trap that isn't one of the ones that are regularly used is close to 0. So it's not like people who speed get fined. It's people who speed and get unlucky get fined (and points). I just think it's bad policy to have relatively huge penalties and relatively rubbish enforcement. It's capricious and ineffective. People still speed because being caught is highly unlikely, people who get caught face a penalty that is disproportionate for something so common. The increase of tools like this don't actually address that. Tools like this don't actually address the policy failure in speed enforcement.
  • mcintyre1994 6y ago
    Ironically you can pretty much only get caught by the irregular ones if you’re on a quiet road too - otherwise someone will flash you as you approach to let you know. At least in some places anyway.
    • noir_lord 6y ago
      Motorcyclists tap their helmet or occasionally hold index figure straight up and spin it. Either works - I've had them do it for me but since I don't speed I just nod and continue my ride.
    • Daho0n 6y ago
      This is a speed trap working as intended though. Lower speed is the goal, not fines.
      • petercooper 6y ago
        You'd think so, but people have been prosecuted for warning other drivers about them.
        • hkt 6y ago
          Source?
          • leetrout 6y ago
            For the US see https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Headlight_flashing#United_States https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Headlight_flashing#United_St...
          • ta988 6y ago
            In US it depends on states: https://www.findcarmeets.com/is-flashing-headlights-to-warn-of-speed-traps-legal/ https://www.findcarmeets.com/is-flashing-headlights-to-warn-...
          • petercooper 6y ago
            https://www.express.co.uk/life-style/cars/1118798/speed-trap-warning-obstructing-police-officer-fine-driving-law https://www.express.co.uk/life-style/cars/1118798/speed-trap...
    • TecoAndJix 6y ago
      Flashing my lights to warn another driver about a speed trap makes me feel like I’m part of some underground resistance
      • everybodyknows 6y ago
        Resistance to government by rule of law?
        • renewiltord 6y ago
          Well, obviously. Every underground resistance has resisted a government that is enforcing laws. That's why they're underground.
    • severino 6y ago
      I sometimes flash people on roads where there are no speed traps. This way I achieve two things: defeating the usefulness of flashing people as a warning and also possibly making people drive slower than they would.
      • hkt 6y ago
        Bravo. I'm going to do this when I start driving again.
        • eertami 6y ago
          Check the laws in your local area first. Intentionally dazzling other drivers may be illegal and can carry a much higher fine (sometimes 10x more) than speeding, depending on country.
          • hkt 6y ago
            I'm in the UK, so it isn't any more illegal than warning drivers.
            • eertami 6y ago
              In the UK you should only flash your high beams to alert other drivers to your presence. Using them as you describe could lead to a £1000 fine. I understand that people using them to warn drivers is also illegal, but two wrongs won't make this right. Why put yourself at risk for no benefit? Honestly you should reconsider. There's enough bad driving on the roads without you adding to it.
      • eertami 6y ago
        So you object to people speeding illegally, yet you have no problem with using your lights to illegally distract other drivers? How curious!
        • vkou 6y ago
          They are making people slow down to the legal limit, thus resulting in a net increase of lawfullness on the road. Also, around here, it's incredibly common to flash your lights to remind oncoming traffic to turn off their high-beams. It's a form of communication, and not all communication is distraction.
  • mFixman 6y ago
    0% of good drivers get caught in speed traps. The main issue is using fines as punishment, since people can affordably keep speeding if there aren't enough speed traps. The only way to solve most road problems is to forbid speeders from ever driving. You already need a driving exam to drive, it doesn't seem crazy to now allow criminals who don't care about speed limits or safety from taking it.
• swarnie_ 6y ago
  Its the "one size fits all" rule which annoys me. My car will comfortably sit at 110mph all day long, if I'm alone on a motorway in the early hours who am i hurting or endangering? It certainly isn't about safety because that same car will stop from 100mph in less distance than the highway code requires for 70.
  • hhmc 6y ago
    > I'm alone on a motorway in the early hours who am i hurting or endangering? - your loved ones - the emergency services that have to clean your body off the road - subsequent road users -- when the road is closed -- to clean your body off the road
    • deleted 6y ago
      [deleted]
    • wizee 6y ago
      Fact is that people drive that speed regularly on German autobahns without any widespread carnage. Driving aggressively when below the speed limit, or being distracted, is far more dangerous than just driving quickly on a clear road. The emphasis on speed is mainly because it’s easy to measure and enforce. There’s standard etiquette there to slow down when there are vehicles in the distance ahead or curves or imperfect visibility. You don’t have to drive like a mindless drone holding a one-size-fits-all-situations speed limit. You and other drivers are generally safer going 160 km/h on a mostly empty highway than 50 km/h through an urban where there’s a much higher risk of encountering other people/vehicles/obstructions.
      • ta988 6y ago
        In Germany not all drivers want to go fast even on unlimited sections. And people are much more respectful (both fast drivers and slow drivers) of who use which lanes and to not push you if you are in the right lane. Statistically you would be safer anyway at 130km/h on that same highway than at 160km/h. Lets compare apples to apples.
• throw0101a 6y ago
  > Personally, I'd rather they clamped down harder on tailgating, poor lane discipline and uninsured drivers than on motorway speed limits. There's some interesting facts (?) that I've learned on the topic of traffic safety over time: certainly the speed one has is directly proportional to how bad an accident will be should a crash (née "accident") occur because of the kinetic energy involved.† However, the speed differential between different vehicles also has a correlation to the accident rate because some folks are going 'too fast' but others are going 'too slow'. I've heard this used as an argument for variable/dynamic speed limits which are changed on factors such as road conditions and visibility. * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Speed_limit#Variable_speed_limits https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Speed_limit#Variable_speed_lim... * https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0001457517302270 https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S00014... † Numberphile has an interesting video on the topic: if a blue car is doing 70 (units/hour) and manages to just stop before an obstacle, what would happen to an identical model/mass red car going 100? Even though the red car was going only 30% faster, at the point that the blue car managed to (just) stop, the red car would be going 70. The energy scrubbed from a starting speed of 70 is 70^2, so 4900; but going at 100 you have 10'000 energy (100^2): so if both cars managed to scrub ~5000 worth of energy, the blue car stopped, but the red car still at 5000 worth of energy left—i.e., 70 units/hour of speed.‡ * https://kottke.org/18/02/why-speeding-is-so-dangerous https://kottke.org/18/02/why-speeding-is-so-dangerous ‡ If you had the same blue/red cars going 55 and 100, while the red car would been going 'only' twice as fast, it would have had three times the kinetic energy because of 55^2 versus 100^2.
• ape4 6y ago
  Tailgating is my biggest hate while driving. The tailgating driver is way over confident that he can stop in time. Its me who will pay the price when he can't. (No I don't drive slowly and do drive in the correct lane when there is a choice.) I hope AVs will fix this.
  • louthy 6y ago
    We don’t need AVs for that. Adaptive Cruise Control with self-breaking cars can do this now; it’s very much how I prefer to drive on a motorway, knowing the car will deal with it if I lose concentration or react late for whatever reason. Obviously these are optional extras on most cars, but the self braking and auto-distance-keeping could be made a legal requirement well before we see self-driving cars. I’d be all for that.
    • ape4 6y ago
      Good point. Sadly some high profile rearing ending tragedy might be necessary.
• tomp 6y ago
  Speeding is one of the most obvious examples of government overreach. 1) The speed limit obviously an arbitrary choice - the chance of death is decent at 50k/h (standard "town" speed limit in Slovenia) (so why not 40hm/k or 30km/h), and e.g. Germany has no speed limit on the highways (in some places) so there's really no good reason to set a limit of 130km/h (why not 110km/h or 150km/h)? 2) The easiest objection to (1) is "society has jointly decided about acceptable risk limits" but that clearly isn't true. Speed limits are simply a bad idea. A much better idea is speed constraints - roundabouts, speed bumps, chicanes [0] - i.e. actually forcing people to drive slower or else they ruin their cars. The fact that governments default to traffic cameras etc. is proof (revealed preference) that they don't actually care about safety and people driving slowly, but what they want most is making their citizens live in fear, punishing them and extracting money from them. This is particularly obvious when there's a hidden police / traffic control on some section of the road where it's obviously safe to drive fast, but it's just technically within city limits so it has a low speed limit. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chicane#/media/File:One-lane_chicane_1.jpg https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chicane#/media/File:One-lane_c...
  • mschuetz 6y ago
    Speed limits are important for non-cars. As a cyclist, I don't want people overtaking me 100km/h with a 1m gap. As a pedestrian trying to cross a small city or town street without dedicated crossing, I don't want drivers to suddenly appear with 100km/h from a small curve. I'd argue that 50km/h in a city is still too much. 30km/h should be the limit.
    • ptr2voidStar 6y ago
      This should be obvious. It's surprising you have to state this for those who only think about themselves and their fast cars. Not all road users are car drivers!
      • t-writescode 6y ago
        Not all roads have multiple kinds of traffic!