Safe Speed Forums

No, I argued that somebody that struck the 10mph car may well have been driving badly themselves. (i.e. not looking, looking to buzz the slow car aggresively).

Cue 10 pages of rhetoric.



I know, I've consistantly said that there is NO SUCH THING as a safe speed.

If somebody is in a car (or on a cycle) thinkning they're travelling at a safe speed they are DELUDED.

Still, I'd rather be struck by a drunk driver doing 25 than a drunk driver doing 60, better chance of survival.



No I didn't, I simply asked for some perspective.

On a fast road like a motorway - driver would travel at say 70 mph - 39 yards per second compared to this driver's 4-5 yards or so per second. In the distance and normal driver expectation of driving standards on this road - they would not realise until closing in that this car was so slow. That's why it was dangerous and why she should have lost her licence and not reverted to "provisional". She was dangerously incompetent.

Now as for your argument in the other thread that sometimes a carmay be broken down in the carriageway. Yes - it happens - but the driver is still mindful of the danger and would normally put on the hazard warnings to alert of danger in the same way as we are allowed to flash them legally when approaching a jam as extra warning on these fast roads.

She was not on hazards.. she was an idiot and it's pure luck SHE did not CAUSE an ACCIDENT.

As for the driver "buzzing the slow car" - my reaction would have been to have hit the hands free and called the cops to get her off the road before she caused a tragedy.

I was once escorted off the motorway when the Wild- Moggie- Stag decided to throw a tantrum some years ago. She lost power.. could not get her to move above 40 mph. Had tried to sort on Hard Shoulder .. then decided to chug off to nearest exit and find garage. Police car passed me.. and stopped me. After I explained the situation.. kind police officer escorted me to nearest exit and even told me where to find decent garage for car




It boils down to COAST. John Franklin does have COAST in his book. He does have a picture version on page 55 -ish. and a similar explanation to us.

Road safety is not about "speed" - it revolves around COAST skills and we are failing to make any further improvement because of the pre-occupation with "keeping to the lolly" and even deluding folk that so long as they keep to this lolly -- somehow they "will never have or survive an accident".

It should never be a slogan of "Speed Kills" or an advert showing an 8 year old telling people that ifthey hit her at 30 mph - she will live.

It should be Green Cross Code and "if I cross the road per this code there is a 90% chance that I will get to the other side without anyone hitting me at any speed."

And COAST telling ALL road users that if they hone up these skills - then there is an 90% chance they will "arrive alive"




I would rather not be hit at all by any drunk. Besides - man died after being hit by the cyclist at that speed. Depends where you injure yourself.



Was no perspective. He rode at speed on a pavement forcing pedestrians out of his way. Witnesses were probably quoted accurately from the court case.

His "learning difficulties" did not prevent him from using the gears on that mountain bike apparently

Chap who pushed me down the gas works.. I would not say he had learning difficulties either. He deliberately chose to ride on the pavement. The road was not busy. Had I landed the wrong way.. I would have been an SI and even a K the cut was deep and close to an artery

But he came up at speed from behind. I was clearly visible and quite legally on the pavement as a pedestrian. Did not hear him and did not expect to be kicked out of the way either.

So we are still back to COAST where C=courtesy and A =Attitude as well.

_________________
If you want to get to heaven - you have to raise a little hell!

Smilies are contagious
They are just like the flu
We use our smilies on YOU today
Now Good Causes are smiling too!

KEEP SMILING
It makes folk wonder just what you REALLY got up to last night!

Smily to penny.. penny to pound
safespeed prospers-smiles all round! !
But the real message? SMILE.. GO ON ! DO IT! and the world will smile with you!
Enjoy life! You only have the one bite at it.

Does Weepej care about road safety?

From reading through his posts I do not think he does.

He does not believe that drivers can drive safely "at speed" (ie any speed over 10mph.

He seems to side with Brake that the 10mph driver should be held up as an example of safe driving.

I think it is possible that Weepej thinks he cares about road safety but he has a very strange way to show it.

_________________
www.thatsnews.org.uk / www.thatsnews.blogspot.com / http://thatsmotoring.blogspot.com/

I don't agree TN. If SSers give Weepej the opportunity to make stupid posts by making equally stupid posts themselves then you can't blame him for replying in kind.
And this thread is chocka block with stupid posts, strawman arguments, irrelevencies, absurd accusations and false representation of the opposing viewpoint (from both sides) its hardly surprising its degenerated into a farce. These threads always do.

_________________
Political Correctness is a doctrine, fostered by a delusional, illogical, liberal minority and rabidly promoted by an unscrupulous mainstream media, which holds forth the proposition that it is entirely possible to pick up a turd by the clean end.

RP, I am not convinced.

If someone can use logic to show the fallacy of an argument then that is not a strawman.

Here are some examples of what I mean:

"I think that woman should have been allowed to drive at 10mph if she wants to!"

"Don't you think that is a foolish and dangerous idea? I mean, what would happen if everyone decided they wanted to drive at 10mph?"

"Strawman! Strawman! You have raised a strawman because I did not call for every driver to be allowed to drive at 10mph, only that woman!"

Now patently that would be absurd. Because if one woman was allowed to drive on a motorway at 10mph, then another woman would do it, then a man, then another man and then another woman and then...

Clearly not everyone would want to drive at 10mph all the time. But enough would to cause traffic jams, gridlock and accidents.

Allowing one woman a special dispensation to drive at 10mph would set a legal precedent.

My understanding of a strawman argument would be if this exchange happened:

"A driver ran into the back of my car yesterday. And it turned out that she was applying make-up, so did not see I had stopped at a crossing."

"Oh! So you are a sexist pig, are you? You are claiming that all accidents involving women drivers are caused by them putting on make-up. A typical misogynistic put down. You'll be calling for all women drivers to either have to wear veils so they can't put make-up on or for them to be banned from driving. Well for your information your idea is illegal as it is in breach of my fundamental Human Rights!"

What idea? The idea the poster never had. A strawman.

However the bogus strawman idea is a tool well known to trolls.

What they do is this: They make a post that is illogical, contains factual errors and absurdities, and generally mischaracterisers the reason for the existence of a forum/website, and perhaps the point of view of an individual poster.

They continue to do this until a poster or a group of posters points out the factual errors, logical absurdities and the fact that they have mischaracterised the website in question.

They often do this by pointing out that if the suggested policies of the poster were carried out (allowing motorists to drive at 10mph on a motorway, for example) that the result would not be blissful driving for everyone but a living nightmare of crashes and gridlock the trolls then come back and accuse the other legitimate posters of using strawmen, of being unfair of not understanding their arguments, etc., etc.

Someone did this on a forum I used to moderate. It transpired, eventually, that it was his sport and he would join a forum or board at random, monitor it for a period of time, spot likely controversial topics, posters who he thought he could wind up and then jump into the forum and cause as much trouble as he could until he became bored and slunk off to cause trouble elsewhere.

_________________
www.thatsnews.org.uk / www.thatsnews.blogspot.com / http://thatsmotoring.blogspot.com/

And this is an example of what I mean.

Did weepej actually say, or even imply that someone should be allowed to drive at 10mph on a motorway? I don't believe he did, although I stand to be corrected on this particular point.
Stating that other drivers should be observent and on the lookout for such hazards is not saying you condone the act itself.

The rest simply follows on from what I believe to be a mis-representation of the point being made.

Besides, it works both ways. Someone comes along and says "You should adhere to the speed limit at all times" and they get the almost inevitable response "Ohhhhh, so you are saying we should drive AT the speed limit at all times then, ever tried taking a mini-roundabout at 30mph....etc etc etc

_________________
Political Correctness is a doctrine, fostered by a delusional, illogical, liberal minority and rabidly promoted by an unscrupulous mainstream media, which holds forth the proposition that it is entirely possible to pick up a turd by the clean end.

I would tend to agree Riggers, but it does make it hard to empathise with posters who's opening gambit is generally a strawman itself, of the ilk "all you SafeSpeeders want is to drive too fast whenever you like with no repercussions".

That's exactly what I mean, Robin!

BTW, I was not using the 10mph example as an attack on Weepej, just a general point.

The 10mph is OK certainly seems to be the official policy of Brake, now!

_________________
www.thatsnews.org.uk / www.thatsnews.blogspot.com / http://thatsmotoring.blogspot.com/

Fair enough, but can you see why I made the mistake of believing you were referring to Weepej?
I've found, on this forum more than any, that you really do have to spell out exactly what you mean lest someone will come along and take the teenys, weensyest crack you may have left in your argument, and create a huge issue out if it

_________________
Political Correctness is a doctrine, fostered by a delusional, illogical, liberal minority and rabidly promoted by an unscrupulous mainstream media, which holds forth the proposition that it is entirely possible to pick up a turd by the clean end.

Agreed, but not all of them do Robin. I feel that some SSers want an opponent to say this, and will often respond as if they did say it even if they didn't, because its an easy accusation to rebuff.

_________________
Political Correctness is a doctrine, fostered by a delusional, illogical, liberal minority and rabidly promoted by an unscrupulous mainstream media, which holds forth the proposition that it is entirely possible to pick up a turd by the clean end.

I know it may well be off topic here BUT

Has the fellow who always quotes C O A S T actually thought to have written this down in a book of some description?

Might be a few quid in it

In my home land -to drive that way would be just as illegal as being 3 mph over speed limit.

Normally - you do not expect this to occur. Normally you made aware via gantries of possible jam. Normally you see the queues of standing traffic in a wave braker. You do not come across a 10 mph on a normal free flow. That the danger.. the complete unexpected illogical idiot who had other routes regardless if she really "so afraid" There no excuses for her behaviour in all reality. Harsh as that sound.. there are none. A learner driver would use A roads. I am not at all convinced that this motorway was only route to a branch of a national chain of stationery stores. Judge was naive.


I can well see how an accident could occur.

After all I was stationary when man taken suddenly ill und really hit hard into me. Nowhere to go. He could have hit anyone.. I took the full impact though.


Weepej did say person had right to be so slow (ist how I interpret und whilst I cannot spell ..und flunked one part of English test.. I score almost "purrfekt"! on comprehension und "play with meaning" part of exams ) ..

But he then also say he rather be hit by the drunk driver at 25 mph than 60 mph. I am like Ted.. I do not want to be hit by any inept or unfit driver at any speed. I had more than enough the last time - thank you.

I want such idiots nobbled. This guy allegedly on pavement.. weaving around. A danger. Could be lethal if Kismet cause the wrong sort of injury to occur. Kismet ist not a nice person.


I applaud the police officer who was off duty und who alerted the on duty officer to arrest the idiot. It why I WANT these officers out there.. all the time. Not a useless speed cam which does zero in reality.



But we still back to IG's COAST. But we DO get idiots who say "Limit ist whatever.. I will drive at this regardless"

I had a bit of argument with one such down our local a year or so back. I did win the argument But he was of the kind who stick to lolly .. even if not safe to do so. He has dented his car on a twisty NSL .. his silly fault as he drove at NSL speed. He drive past row of parked cars at 30 mph at 30 mph - even though not safe und there were kids milling around the area.

Complacent.. bizarrely complacent.

I am pleased to say .. I convince him to go to IAM. He not happy at result of observed drive .. but at least he perservere because I hissed at him with hackle raised.

I do my bit. Steviebabes has one less potential disaster on doorstep. I do his work for him better


But I edit as I not want weepej to take offence und think I get at him personally.

I actually think the guy OK und think he does meet a little of the way. I think he already thinking we have good points somehow.

B ut ist all about COAST skills. It funny .. but every single time .. we come back to these essentials und I think we must focus much more on COAST skills if we are to cut the carnage out there.

It cannot be an accident that DIS und Speed Awares mark to COAST values after all. This prove its "peer review credential" after all

_________________
Nicht ganz im Lot!
Ich setze mich immer wieder in die Nesseln! Der Mad Doc ist mein Mann! Und ich benutzte seinen PC!

UND OUR SMILEYS? Smile ... und the the world smiles with you.
Smiley guy seen when you read
Fine me for Safe Speed
(& other good causes..)

Greatest love & Greatest Achievements Require Greatest Risk
But if you lose the driving plan - don't lose the COAST lesson.
Me?
Je ne regrette rien!

I think already raised. As I understand from chat with my liebsten cousin .. IG tell someone who want to publish his Hendon Notes to do so.. but to attribute all ensuing royalty to the safespeed legacy as he use this forum to preach it in first place.


The relationship? His papa und my mama are brother und sister. I grow up in Switzerland as youngest of large family. Suffer learned German from Mama .. who too busy to "immerse me in English" .. suffer "expectations of the English teacher from hell who thought I should be more fluent in English".. lost interest und played up all teachers as am sassy idiot who cut off whisker to spite feline face .

As result .. have probably the worst command of English on record :paperbag:

_________________
Nicht ganz im Lot!
Ich setze mich immer wieder in die Nesseln! Der Mad Doc ist mein Mann! Und ich benutzte seinen PC!

UND OUR SMILEYS? Smile ... und the the world smiles with you.
Smiley guy seen when you read
Fine me for Safe Speed
(& other good causes..)

Greatest love & Greatest Achievements Require Greatest Risk
But if you lose the driving plan - don't lose the COAST lesson.
Me?
Je ne regrette rien!

Yup, 30 in a 30 (and slower as the road dictated).

Not possible to let him overtake, nowhere to pull in, road had parked cars on both sides and traffic islands with 1.5 car widths in the middle spare.



I really don't care, I won't make it hard for somebody that wants to do this, but his first chance was when I slowed down for a crossing he didn't see because he presumably he was more interested in getting round me and sitting at the lights about 100 yards up the road whilst I pulled up behind him.

I explicitly stated is was absolutely the right thing to do to remove her from the motorway.

Rigpig, having had a quick read of this particular page of this thread, I just wanted to say a big "well done" for understanding what goes on a lot of the time - well done!

I confused. Are you saying you drive at 30 mph past line of parked cars with traffic islands? That not a safe speed.

Und person tailgating then even more numpty.. but if there traffic islands und pedestrian refuges along road.. how come they suddenly disappear at the crossing where most needed und where he allegedly overtake



Better to have the idiot in front than behind you. But in any case .. you both passing parked cars with traffic islands I would have been at slower margin than that. If he persist in the tail gate .. I try to give him continental signal that I find him too close. Sometimes UK driver get message Sometimes they pig ignorant of course

But his driving ..it why we need cops on regular patrol out there. Paulie stated the obvious on that one. As do I.

_________________
Nicht ganz im Lot!
Ich setze mich immer wieder in die Nesseln! Der Mad Doc ist mein Mann! Und ich benutzte seinen PC!

UND OUR SMILEYS? Smile ... und the the world smiles with you.
Smiley guy seen when you read
Fine me for Safe Speed
(& other good causes..)

Greatest love & Greatest Achievements Require Greatest Risk
But if you lose the driving plan - don't lose the COAST lesson.
Me?
Je ne regrette rien!

I certainly hope no-one thinks this. For myself, I spot the new user's L-plate and either breathe a mighty sigh of relief when they seem to be 'one of us', or else a groan when they turn out to be here to stir up trouble. I guess I can't really think of more than one or two specific 'regulars' who seem to relish a 20-page argument, and the ones that do don't really 'toe the party line' anyway.

As I've said elsewhere, maybe it's just me, but I can't imagine spending much time on a forum where 99% of people disagreed with me utterly, whereas being just a bit divergent from the party line can be faun & will probably change others' opinions far more than direct opposition. I imagine handy will change more people's opinions more than hjeg ever will, by being humorous and not downright confrontational.

As for the "try driving at exactly the speed limit" argument, I agree it's fatuous but it's no more fatuous than saying 31mph is 1,000,000 times more dangerous than 30, and it's a good if simplistic illustration of the flaw in the argument of 100% adherence to limits. The counter view is "Drive at the limit only when it is safe to do so" which leads to the conclusion that at those times when your top speed is curtailed by the limit , then it would be safe to exceed it anyway.

What it is, or is not comparable with is irrelevant Johnny. If its cited back at someone as a rebuttal to an opposing viewpoint in a manner that suggests that this is what the opponent is saying (when they are not) then the seeds are sown for an indignant reply. And an indignant reply will begat another and so on.

_________________
Political Correctness is a doctrine, fostered by a delusional, illogical, liberal minority and rabidly promoted by an unscrupulous mainstream media, which holds forth the proposition that it is entirely possible to pick up a turd by the clean end.

Well, quite.