More than 2,000 lorries caught speeding by Hampshire police in one week

More than 2,000 lorries caught speeding

More than 2,000 lorries caught speeding

First published in News
Last updated
Daily Echo: Photograph of the Author by , Chief Reporter, New Forest

More than 2,000 lorries were caught flouting the speed limit during a crackdown by Hampshire police.

Officers took part in a Europe-wide week of action aimed at making roads safer by ensuring that truckers keep their speed down.

Drivers pulled over by the police were warned of the dangers caused by lorries travelling too fast.

Road Safety Sergeant Rob Heard said: “Excessive or inappropriate speed has a singularly devastating impact on the safety of road users, increasing both the risk of a crash and the severity of the consequences.

“Hampshire Constabulary is committed to increasing road safety on our roads and will continue to target those who fail to abide by the speed limits and deal with them by either education or prosecution.

“Our aim is quite simple: to improve the knowledge, attitudes and behaviour of any drivers who speed, thereby reducing the likelihood of the driver being involved in a future speeding incident and make our roads safer for all.”

Speeding is thought to be a contributory factor in one in three of all fatal crashes across Europe.

Sgt Heard added: “This campaign demonstrates the resolve of police forces across Europe to tackling the issue of speeding.

“It also highlights to all drivers the possibility of being prosecuted is very real if travelling at excessive speed.”

Comments (59)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

11:09am Mon 28 Apr 14

allstar says...

Only 3 per cent of car accidents are caused by speeding drivers, Government figures have revealed.
Yet there are nearly 7,000 speed cameras across the country which are unable to detect 'careless or reckless' drivers who cause three times as many accidents.
Four of the five most frequently reported contributory factors in accidents involved driver or rider error or reaction.
Sgt Heard added: “This campaign demonstrates the resolve of police forces across Europe to tackling the issue of speeding.
This is just more headline grabbing when the real issues are not being tackled , The police need to focus more on the bad driver instead they go for the easy option.
Only 3 per cent of car accidents are caused by speeding drivers, Government figures have revealed. Yet there are nearly 7,000 speed cameras across the country which are unable to detect 'careless or reckless' drivers who cause three times as many accidents. Four of the five most frequently reported contributory factors in accidents involved driver or rider error or reaction. Sgt Heard added: “This campaign demonstrates the resolve of police forces across Europe to tackling the issue of speeding. This is just more headline grabbing when the real issues are not being tackled , The police need to focus more on the bad driver instead they go for the easy option. allstar
  • Score: 54

11:31am Mon 28 Apr 14

Bb5061 says...

“Our aim is quite simple"- to subsidise Hampshire constabulary with the hard-earned money of struggling, normal people. A great week for Hampshire Constabulary's public relations-NOT! Shame!
“Our aim is quite simple"- to subsidise Hampshire constabulary with the hard-earned money of struggling, normal people. A great week for Hampshire Constabulary's public relations-NOT! Shame! Bb5061
  • Score: 8

11:36am Mon 28 Apr 14

Mr E says...

I wish they would do something about the lorries that sit less than 6 feet behind me on the motorway,
I wish they would do something about the lorries that sit less than 6 feet behind me on the motorway, Mr E
  • Score: 32

11:43am Mon 28 Apr 14

Charlie Bucket says...

Mr E wrote:
I wish they would do something about the lorries that sit less than 6 feet behind me on the motorway,
Sounds to me like you could do something about that yourself.
[quote][p][bold]Mr E[/bold] wrote: I wish they would do something about the lorries that sit less than 6 feet behind me on the motorway,[/p][/quote]Sounds to me like you could do something about that yourself. Charlie Bucket
  • Score: 30

11:48am Mon 28 Apr 14

elvisimo says...

Bb5061 wrote:
“Our aim is quite simple"- to subsidise Hampshire constabulary with the hard-earned money of struggling, normal people. A great week for Hampshire Constabulary's public relations-NOT! Shame!
so by that logic you should be able to drive along at whatever speed you deem suitable?
[quote][p][bold]Bb5061[/bold] wrote: “Our aim is quite simple"- to subsidise Hampshire constabulary with the hard-earned money of struggling, normal people. A great week for Hampshire Constabulary's public relations-NOT! Shame![/p][/quote]so by that logic you should be able to drive along at whatever speed you deem suitable? elvisimo
  • Score: 21

12:02pm Mon 28 Apr 14

espanuel says...

Mr E wrote:
I wish they would do something about the lorries that sit less than 6 feet behind me on the motorway,
When they are behind you start slowing down.
[quote][p][bold]Mr E[/bold] wrote: I wish they would do something about the lorries that sit less than 6 feet behind me on the motorway,[/p][/quote]When they are behind you start slowing down. espanuel
  • Score: 5

12:41pm Mon 28 Apr 14

cliffwalker says...

"The police need to focus more on the bad driver instead they go for the easy option."
Perhaps, and if so what in practical terms should the police do? Technology makes it easy to find speedsters - at least in the vicinity of cameras - and the vast majority of speeding offences are not uncovered by police action. A huge increase in traffic patrols by expensive personnel in expensive cars would be required to replace the cameras. Are we prepared to fund such an increase in expenditure?
"The police need to focus more on the bad driver instead they go for the easy option." Perhaps, and if so what in practical terms should the police do? Technology makes it easy to find speedsters - at least in the vicinity of cameras - and the vast majority of speeding offences are not uncovered by police action. A huge increase in traffic patrols by expensive personnel in expensive cars would be required to replace the cameras. Are we prepared to fund such an increase in expenditure? cliffwalker
  • Score: 1

1:13pm Mon 28 Apr 14

Bb5061 says...

elvisimo wrote:
Bb5061 wrote:
“Our aim is quite simple"- to subsidise Hampshire constabulary with the hard-earned money of struggling, normal people. A great week for Hampshire Constabulary's public relations-NOT! Shame!
so by that logic you should be able to drive along at whatever speed you deem suitable?
No not at all, I just do not agree silly little men/women sitting in bushes along the road side whose soul purpose is not to ensure safety, but to punish and profiteer! It's always confused me as to why they continue to sit there after taking a photo, rather than stop the driver and prevent him/her from driving further. The answer must be that they are not concerned with that driver's 'dangerous speeding' but in the profit which can be made from him/her doing so! To then revel about their success with stories like this, just makes the blood boil!
[quote][p][bold]elvisimo[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Bb5061[/bold] wrote: “Our aim is quite simple"- to subsidise Hampshire constabulary with the hard-earned money of struggling, normal people. A great week for Hampshire Constabulary's public relations-NOT! Shame![/p][/quote]so by that logic you should be able to drive along at whatever speed you deem suitable?[/p][/quote]No not at all, I just do not agree silly little men/women sitting in bushes along the road side whose soul purpose is not to ensure safety, but to punish and profiteer! It's always confused me as to why they continue to sit there after taking a photo, rather than stop the driver and prevent him/her from driving further. The answer must be that they are not concerned with that driver's 'dangerous speeding' but in the profit which can be made from him/her doing so! To then revel about their success with stories like this, just makes the blood boil! Bb5061
  • Score: 10

1:20pm Mon 28 Apr 14

Quentin Heslop says...

2000 'speeding' but no accidents reported. Zero correlation of speed causing accidents from the evidence provided.
2000 'speeding' but no accidents reported. Zero correlation of speed causing accidents from the evidence provided. Quentin Heslop
  • Score: 6

1:29pm Mon 28 Apr 14

KSO16R says...

allstar wrote:
Only 3 per cent of car accidents are caused by speeding drivers, Government figures have revealed. Yet there are nearly 7,000 speed cameras across the country which are unable to detect 'careless or reckless' drivers who cause three times as many accidents. Four of the five most frequently reported contributory factors in accidents involved driver or rider error or reaction. Sgt Heard added: “This campaign demonstrates the resolve of police forces across Europe to tackling the issue of speeding. This is just more headline grabbing when the real issues are not being tackled , The police need to focus more on the bad driver instead they go for the easy option.
The risk of driver error increases when speeding and reaction times decrease when driving too fast. Breaking the speed limit is against the law and punishment should be harsher
[quote][p][bold]allstar[/bold] wrote: Only 3 per cent of car accidents are caused by speeding drivers, Government figures have revealed. Yet there are nearly 7,000 speed cameras across the country which are unable to detect 'careless or reckless' drivers who cause three times as many accidents. Four of the five most frequently reported contributory factors in accidents involved driver or rider error or reaction. Sgt Heard added: “This campaign demonstrates the resolve of police forces across Europe to tackling the issue of speeding. This is just more headline grabbing when the real issues are not being tackled , The police need to focus more on the bad driver instead they go for the easy option.[/p][/quote]The risk of driver error increases when speeding and reaction times decrease when driving too fast. Breaking the speed limit is against the law and punishment should be harsher KSO16R
  • Score: -10

1:45pm Mon 28 Apr 14

KSO16R says...

KSO16R wrote:
allstar wrote: Only 3 per cent of car accidents are caused by speeding drivers, Government figures have revealed. Yet there are nearly 7,000 speed cameras across the country which are unable to detect 'careless or reckless' drivers who cause three times as many accidents. Four of the five most frequently reported contributory factors in accidents involved driver or rider error or reaction. Sgt Heard added: “This campaign demonstrates the resolve of police forces across Europe to tackling the issue of speeding. This is just more headline grabbing when the real issues are not being tackled , The police need to focus more on the bad driver instead they go for the easy option.
The risk of driver error increases when speeding and reaction times decrease when driving too fast. Breaking the speed limit is against the law and punishment should be harsher
Oh yes . . Speeding is bad driving! More thumbs down you morons
[quote][p][bold]KSO16R[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]allstar[/bold] wrote: Only 3 per cent of car accidents are caused by speeding drivers, Government figures have revealed. Yet there are nearly 7,000 speed cameras across the country which are unable to detect 'careless or reckless' drivers who cause three times as many accidents. Four of the five most frequently reported contributory factors in accidents involved driver or rider error or reaction. Sgt Heard added: “This campaign demonstrates the resolve of police forces across Europe to tackling the issue of speeding. This is just more headline grabbing when the real issues are not being tackled , The police need to focus more on the bad driver instead they go for the easy option.[/p][/quote]The risk of driver error increases when speeding and reaction times decrease when driving too fast. Breaking the speed limit is against the law and punishment should be harsher[/p][/quote]Oh yes . . Speeding is bad driving! More thumbs down you morons KSO16R
  • Score: -4

1:55pm Mon 28 Apr 14

The Phantomerer says...

KSO16R wrote:
allstar wrote:
Only 3 per cent of car accidents are caused by speeding drivers, Government figures have revealed. Yet there are nearly 7,000 speed cameras across the country which are unable to detect 'careless or reckless' drivers who cause three times as many accidents. Four of the five most frequently reported contributory factors in accidents involved driver or rider error or reaction. Sgt Heard added: “This campaign demonstrates the resolve of police forces across Europe to tackling the issue of speeding. This is just more headline grabbing when the real issues are not being tackled , The police need to focus more on the bad driver instead they go for the easy option.
The risk of driver error increases when speeding and reaction times decrease when driving too fast. Breaking the speed limit is against the law and punishment should be harsher
Wrong. Google for a report entitled: "Speeding Effects on Hazard perception and reaction time." The report suggests that increased speed leads to improved driver focus and, therefore, improved reaction times. Punishment for speeding should not be harsher, punishment for bad driving should be.
[quote][p][bold]KSO16R[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]allstar[/bold] wrote: Only 3 per cent of car accidents are caused by speeding drivers, Government figures have revealed. Yet there are nearly 7,000 speed cameras across the country which are unable to detect 'careless or reckless' drivers who cause three times as many accidents. Four of the five most frequently reported contributory factors in accidents involved driver or rider error or reaction. Sgt Heard added: “This campaign demonstrates the resolve of police forces across Europe to tackling the issue of speeding. This is just more headline grabbing when the real issues are not being tackled , The police need to focus more on the bad driver instead they go for the easy option.[/p][/quote]The risk of driver error increases when speeding and reaction times decrease when driving too fast. Breaking the speed limit is against the law and punishment should be harsher[/p][/quote]Wrong. Google for a report entitled: "Speeding Effects on Hazard perception and reaction time." The report suggests that increased speed leads to improved driver focus and, therefore, improved reaction times. Punishment for speeding should not be harsher, punishment for bad driving should be. The Phantomerer
  • Score: 11

2:30pm Mon 28 Apr 14

dimebag99 says...

i drove a lorry for about 25 years and the pressure that is put on the driver by employers is unbelievable.i was in dorchester on a friday afternoon once at three pm and i was expected to go to weymouth and drive back by 5pm.and this is the normal sort of thing.too many compaines expect drivers to get from A-B too quickly and will pressure you into speeding.
i drove a lorry for about 25 years and the pressure that is put on the driver by employers is unbelievable.i was in dorchester on a friday afternoon once at three pm and i was expected to go to weymouth and drive back by 5pm.and this is the normal sort of thing.too many compaines expect drivers to get from A-B too quickly and will pressure you into speeding. dimebag99
  • Score: 24

2:39pm Mon 28 Apr 14

miltonarcher says...

Speeding HGV's are potentially more dangerous because of the distance it takes them to stop and the risk of jack-knifing. However, most HGV tailgate, sometimes just a couple of metres from the vehicle in front. Surely the police should focus on this rather than just speed?
Speeding HGV's are potentially more dangerous because of the distance it takes them to stop and the risk of jack-knifing. However, most HGV tailgate, sometimes just a couple of metres from the vehicle in front. Surely the police should focus on this rather than just speed? miltonarcher
  • Score: 20

3:22pm Mon 28 Apr 14

KSO16R says...

The Phantomerer wrote:
KSO16R wrote:
allstar wrote: Only 3 per cent of car accidents are caused by speeding drivers, Government figures have revealed. Yet there are nearly 7,000 speed cameras across the country which are unable to detect 'careless or reckless' drivers who cause three times as many accidents. Four of the five most frequently reported contributory factors in accidents involved driver or rider error or reaction. Sgt Heard added: “This campaign demonstrates the resolve of police forces across Europe to tackling the issue of speeding. This is just more headline grabbing when the real issues are not being tackled , The police need to focus more on the bad driver instead they go for the easy option.
The risk of driver error increases when speeding and reaction times decrease when driving too fast. Breaking the speed limit is against the law and punishment should be harsher
Wrong. Google for a report entitled: "Speeding Effects on Hazard perception and reaction time." The report suggests that increased speed leads to improved driver focus and, therefore, improved reaction times. Punishment for speeding should not be harsher, punishment for bad driving should be.
'A report suggests' . . . Really : ) what about the other road users ? Take your driving test again and tell the examiner that you will be breaking the speed limits because it helps you focus. Then when you fail don't forget some change for your buss fare home. Laughable if it wasn't for the fact that you are trying to justify breaking the law.
[quote][p][bold]The Phantomerer[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]KSO16R[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]allstar[/bold] wrote: Only 3 per cent of car accidents are caused by speeding drivers, Government figures have revealed. Yet there are nearly 7,000 speed cameras across the country which are unable to detect 'careless or reckless' drivers who cause three times as many accidents. Four of the five most frequently reported contributory factors in accidents involved driver or rider error or reaction. Sgt Heard added: “This campaign demonstrates the resolve of police forces across Europe to tackling the issue of speeding. This is just more headline grabbing when the real issues are not being tackled , The police need to focus more on the bad driver instead they go for the easy option.[/p][/quote]The risk of driver error increases when speeding and reaction times decrease when driving too fast. Breaking the speed limit is against the law and punishment should be harsher[/p][/quote]Wrong. Google for a report entitled: "Speeding Effects on Hazard perception and reaction time." The report suggests that increased speed leads to improved driver focus and, therefore, improved reaction times. Punishment for speeding should not be harsher, punishment for bad driving should be.[/p][/quote]'A report suggests' . . . Really : ) what about the other road users ? Take your driving test again and tell the examiner that you will be breaking the speed limits because it helps you focus. Then when you fail don't forget some change for your buss fare home. Laughable if it wasn't for the fact that you are trying to justify breaking the law. KSO16R
  • Score: 1

4:04pm Mon 28 Apr 14

City Final says...

KSO16R wrote:
allstar wrote:
Only 3 per cent of car accidents are caused by speeding drivers, Government figures have revealed. Yet there are nearly 7,000 speed cameras across the country which are unable to detect 'careless or reckless' drivers who cause three times as many accidents. Four of the five most frequently reported contributory factors in accidents involved driver or rider error or reaction. Sgt Heard added: “This campaign demonstrates the resolve of police forces across Europe to tackling the issue of speeding. This is just more headline grabbing when the real issues are not being tackled , The police need to focus more on the bad driver instead they go for the easy option.
The risk of driver error increases when speeding and reaction times decrease when driving too fast. Breaking the speed limit is against the law and punishment should be harsher
It depends on road/traffic/weather conditions. On a drive to Cornwall, when I hit the A30 at Honiton the 3 lane A road is more often than not virtually empty Letting my speedo increase to 90 along this stretch in good visibility on a dry day causes no danger to anyone in those condition and if I were punished for speeding there I would feel aggrieved. Conversely, if I were caught doing just 35 through the quaint village of Chideok a few miles previous on the journey I would accept it as fully justified.
[quote][p][bold]KSO16R[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]allstar[/bold] wrote: Only 3 per cent of car accidents are caused by speeding drivers, Government figures have revealed. Yet there are nearly 7,000 speed cameras across the country which are unable to detect 'careless or reckless' drivers who cause three times as many accidents. Four of the five most frequently reported contributory factors in accidents involved driver or rider error or reaction. Sgt Heard added: “This campaign demonstrates the resolve of police forces across Europe to tackling the issue of speeding. This is just more headline grabbing when the real issues are not being tackled , The police need to focus more on the bad driver instead they go for the easy option.[/p][/quote]The risk of driver error increases when speeding and reaction times decrease when driving too fast. Breaking the speed limit is against the law and punishment should be harsher[/p][/quote]It depends on road/traffic/weather conditions. On a drive to Cornwall, when I hit the A30 at Honiton the 3 lane A road is more often than not virtually empty Letting my speedo increase to 90 along this stretch in good visibility on a dry day causes no danger to anyone in those condition and if I were punished for speeding there I would feel aggrieved. Conversely, if I were caught doing just 35 through the quaint village of Chideok a few miles previous on the journey I would accept it as fully justified. City Final
  • Score: 2

4:19pm Mon 28 Apr 14

From the sidelines says...

KSO16R wrote:
allstar wrote:
Only 3 per cent of car accidents are caused by speeding drivers, Government figures have revealed. Yet there are nearly 7,000 speed cameras across the country which are unable to detect 'careless or reckless' drivers who cause three times as many accidents. Four of the five most frequently reported contributory factors in accidents involved driver or rider error or reaction. Sgt Heard added: “This campaign demonstrates the resolve of police forces across Europe to tackling the issue of speeding. This is just more headline grabbing when the real issues are not being tackled , The police need to focus more on the bad driver instead they go for the easy option.
The risk of driver error increases when speeding and reaction times decrease when driving too fast. Breaking the speed limit is against the law and punishment should be harsher
Neither of your statements is correct.
[quote][p][bold]KSO16R[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]allstar[/bold] wrote: Only 3 per cent of car accidents are caused by speeding drivers, Government figures have revealed. Yet there are nearly 7,000 speed cameras across the country which are unable to detect 'careless or reckless' drivers who cause three times as many accidents. Four of the five most frequently reported contributory factors in accidents involved driver or rider error or reaction. Sgt Heard added: “This campaign demonstrates the resolve of police forces across Europe to tackling the issue of speeding. This is just more headline grabbing when the real issues are not being tackled , The police need to focus more on the bad driver instead they go for the easy option.[/p][/quote]The risk of driver error increases when speeding and reaction times decrease when driving too fast. Breaking the speed limit is against the law and punishment should be harsher[/p][/quote]Neither of your statements is correct. From the sidelines
  • Score: 0

4:25pm Mon 28 Apr 14

downfader says...

People who moan about speed traps are often by definitions breakers of that specific law themselves I notice.

Dont like the fine? Dont do the crime.
People who moan about speed traps are often by definitions breakers of that specific law themselves I notice. Dont like the fine? Dont do the crime. downfader
  • Score: 2

4:52pm Mon 28 Apr 14

Tye-Dye pt2 says...

Mr E wrote:
I wish they would do something about the lorries that sit less than 6 feet behind me on the motorway,
Mr E, with all due respect HGV's are limited to 55mph and are only allowed to do that speed on motorways, the simple course of action for you to take is to speed up to 60/65 mph for a couple of miles and he will be a distant blur in your rear view mirror.
[quote][p][bold]Mr E[/bold] wrote: I wish they would do something about the lorries that sit less than 6 feet behind me on the motorway,[/p][/quote]Mr E, with all due respect HGV's are limited to 55mph and are only allowed to do that speed on motorways, the simple course of action for you to take is to speed up to 60/65 mph for a couple of miles and he will be a distant blur in your rear view mirror. Tye-Dye pt2
  • Score: 15

5:03pm Mon 28 Apr 14

biggus2 says...

The trouble with HGVs tailgating is that it requires Traffic Police to be on patrol unfortunately due to the current financial constraints they have been cut back beyond the bone. You will be unlucky to be caught doing anything wrong on the roads today as there isn't enough of them out there. However when a fatal collision occurs any where in Hampshire it takes most of those resources to deal with it. Which is why Safety Camera Partnerships were invented. To do Static Speed enforcement. They are well signed and positioned if you have reasonable eyesight you should see them. Sussex bless them will even tell you where they are going to be in the local paper. If you stick to the speed limit you won't be caught dont blame the Feds for your speeding and lack of observation
The trouble with HGVs tailgating is that it requires Traffic Police to be on patrol unfortunately due to the current financial constraints they have been cut back beyond the bone. You will be unlucky to be caught doing anything wrong on the roads today as there isn't enough of them out there. However when a fatal collision occurs any where in Hampshire it takes most of those resources to deal with it. Which is why Safety Camera Partnerships were invented. To do Static Speed enforcement. They are well signed and positioned if you have reasonable eyesight you should see them. Sussex bless them will even tell you where they are going to be in the local paper. If you stick to the speed limit you won't be caught dont blame the Feds for your speeding and lack of observation biggus2
  • Score: 3

5:16pm Mon 28 Apr 14

good-gosh says...

Speed checks improve compliance – there is no doubt of that - and the police are far more considerate towards marginal offenders than are automatic cameras.
Speed checks improve compliance – there is no doubt of that - and the police are far more considerate towards marginal offenders than are automatic cameras. good-gosh
  • Score: 3

5:32pm Mon 28 Apr 14

The Mad Dog says...

Bb5061 wrote:
“Our aim is quite simple"- to subsidise Hampshire constabulary with the hard-earned money of struggling, normal people. A great week for Hampshire Constabulary's public relations-NOT! Shame!
I think you'll find that the money from the fines goes to the Ministry of Transport or Ministry of Justice, either way: the government.
The message is fairly simple though, for hard working, normal people who are struggling with their hard earned money. Don't break the law and you won't get a speeding fine. #simples
[quote][p][bold]Bb5061[/bold] wrote: “Our aim is quite simple"- to subsidise Hampshire constabulary with the hard-earned money of struggling, normal people. A great week for Hampshire Constabulary's public relations-NOT! Shame![/p][/quote]I think you'll find that the money from the fines goes to the Ministry of Transport or Ministry of Justice, either way: the government. The message is fairly simple though, for hard working, normal people who are struggling with their hard earned money. Don't break the law and you won't get a speeding fine. #simples The Mad Dog
  • Score: 7

5:40pm Mon 28 Apr 14

The Phantomerer says...

KSO16R wrote:
The Phantomerer wrote:
KSO16R wrote:
allstar wrote: Only 3 per cent of car accidents are caused by speeding drivers, Government figures have revealed. Yet there are nearly 7,000 speed cameras across the country which are unable to detect 'careless or reckless' drivers who cause three times as many accidents. Four of the five most frequently reported contributory factors in accidents involved driver or rider error or reaction. Sgt Heard added: “This campaign demonstrates the resolve of police forces across Europe to tackling the issue of speeding. This is just more headline grabbing when the real issues are not being tackled , The police need to focus more on the bad driver instead they go for the easy option.
The risk of driver error increases when speeding and reaction times decrease when driving too fast. Breaking the speed limit is against the law and punishment should be harsher
Wrong. Google for a report entitled: "Speeding Effects on Hazard perception and reaction time." The report suggests that increased speed leads to improved driver focus and, therefore, improved reaction times. Punishment for speeding should not be harsher, punishment for bad driving should be.
'A report suggests' . . . Really : ) what about the other road users ? Take your driving test again and tell the examiner that you will be breaking the speed limits because it helps you focus. Then when you fail don't forget some change for your buss fare home. Laughable if it wasn't for the fact that you are trying to justify breaking the law.
I'm sensing a lot of anger from you and little in the way of sensible argument. I'm guessing you didn't read the report, or you would be able to point out where you consider it to be flawed? Also, please explain where I am attempting to justify criminal behaviour? I am quite open to accepting the report is inaccurate, but you'd better come up with something better than "other road users ?" what does that even mean? It is just hanging there in your response, seemingly disconnected from any cohesive thought you might have managed to conjure up. Your comments about taking a driving test again are just nonsense ramblings, so I'm not even going to bother addressing them.
[quote][p][bold]KSO16R[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]The Phantomerer[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]KSO16R[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]allstar[/bold] wrote: Only 3 per cent of car accidents are caused by speeding drivers, Government figures have revealed. Yet there are nearly 7,000 speed cameras across the country which are unable to detect 'careless or reckless' drivers who cause three times as many accidents. Four of the five most frequently reported contributory factors in accidents involved driver or rider error or reaction. Sgt Heard added: “This campaign demonstrates the resolve of police forces across Europe to tackling the issue of speeding. This is just more headline grabbing when the real issues are not being tackled , The police need to focus more on the bad driver instead they go for the easy option.[/p][/quote]The risk of driver error increases when speeding and reaction times decrease when driving too fast. Breaking the speed limit is against the law and punishment should be harsher[/p][/quote]Wrong. Google for a report entitled: "Speeding Effects on Hazard perception and reaction time." The report suggests that increased speed leads to improved driver focus and, therefore, improved reaction times. Punishment for speeding should not be harsher, punishment for bad driving should be.[/p][/quote]'A report suggests' . . . Really : ) what about the other road users ? Take your driving test again and tell the examiner that you will be breaking the speed limits because it helps you focus. Then when you fail don't forget some change for your buss fare home. Laughable if it wasn't for the fact that you are trying to justify breaking the law.[/p][/quote]I'm sensing a lot of anger from you and little in the way of sensible argument. I'm guessing you didn't read the report, or you would be able to point out where you consider it to be flawed? Also, please explain where I am attempting to justify criminal behaviour? I am quite open to accepting the report is inaccurate, but you'd better come up with something better than "other road users ?" what does that even mean? It is just hanging there in your response, seemingly disconnected from any cohesive thought you might have managed to conjure up. Your comments about taking a driving test again are just nonsense ramblings, so I'm not even going to bother addressing them. The Phantomerer
  • Score: -7

6:05pm Mon 28 Apr 14

Stubs says...

Speed kills.
Speed kills. Stubs
  • Score: -4

6:30pm Mon 28 Apr 14

Somewhere local says...

Stubs wrote:
Speed kills.
No it doesn't it is usually the sudden stop that does it
[quote][p][bold]Stubs[/bold] wrote: Speed kills.[/p][/quote]No it doesn't it is usually the sudden stop that does it Somewhere local
  • Score: 11

6:43pm Mon 28 Apr 14

allstar says...

The Mad Dog wrote:
Bb5061 wrote:
“Our aim is quite simple"- to subsidise Hampshire constabulary with the hard-earned money of struggling, normal people. A great week for Hampshire Constabulary's public relations-NOT! Shame!
I think you'll find that the money from the fines goes to the Ministry of Transport or Ministry of Justice, either way: the government.
The message is fairly simple though, for hard working, normal people who are struggling with their hard earned money. Don't break the law and you won't get a speeding fine. #simples
Daily Echo April 28th 2014 statement by police.
Hampshire Constabulary said the cash generated by speed cameras is reinvested in the county’s road policing schemes but dismissed claims it is a tax on motorists.

A spokesman said: “It funds the safer roads unit, which works on the issues to do with safety cameras, including the criminal justice part of it, such as paperwork and fines.

“It funds the team and the courses that give the important driver awareness training.
[quote][p][bold]The Mad Dog[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Bb5061[/bold] wrote: “Our aim is quite simple"- to subsidise Hampshire constabulary with the hard-earned money of struggling, normal people. A great week for Hampshire Constabulary's public relations-NOT! Shame![/p][/quote]I think you'll find that the money from the fines goes to the Ministry of Transport or Ministry of Justice, either way: the government. The message is fairly simple though, for hard working, normal people who are struggling with their hard earned money. Don't break the law and you won't get a speeding fine. #simples[/p][/quote]Daily Echo April 28th 2014 statement by police. Hampshire Constabulary said the cash generated by speed cameras is reinvested in the county’s road policing schemes but dismissed claims it is a tax on motorists. A spokesman said: “It funds the safer roads unit, which works on the issues to do with safety cameras, including the criminal justice part of it, such as paperwork and fines. “It funds the team and the courses that give the important driver awareness training. allstar
  • Score: -3

6:55pm Mon 28 Apr 14

Ginger_cyclist says...

Somewhere local wrote:
Stubs wrote:
Speed kills.
No it doesn't it is usually the sudden stop that does it
But the faster you go, the more violent that sudden stop becomes and with it, the likelyhood of being killed or killing someone increases, you could even be kiled at 20 to 30mph under the right circumstances.
[quote][p][bold]Somewhere local[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Stubs[/bold] wrote: Speed kills.[/p][/quote]No it doesn't it is usually the sudden stop that does it[/p][/quote]But the faster you go, the more violent that sudden stop becomes and with it, the likelyhood of being killed or killing someone increases, you could even be kiled at 20 to 30mph under the right circumstances. Ginger_cyclist
  • Score: 0

6:58pm Mon 28 Apr 14

mickey01 says...

Mr E wrote:
I wish they would do something about the lorries that sit less than 6 feet behind me on the motorway,
maybe putting your own foot down would be a good idea
[quote][p][bold]Mr E[/bold] wrote: I wish they would do something about the lorries that sit less than 6 feet behind me on the motorway,[/p][/quote]maybe putting your own foot down would be a good idea mickey01
  • Score: 1

7:18pm Mon 28 Apr 14

red/whitearmy says...

Mr E wrote:
I wish they would do something about the lorries that sit less than 6 feet behind me on the motorway,
6 Feet , Thats quite a distance anyway. How about cars that sit less than that distance then.
[quote][p][bold]Mr E[/bold] wrote: I wish they would do something about the lorries that sit less than 6 feet behind me on the motorway,[/p][/quote]6 Feet , Thats quite a distance anyway. How about cars that sit less than that distance then. red/whitearmy
  • Score: 1

7:20pm Mon 28 Apr 14

Ginger_cyclist says...

red/whitearmy wrote:
Mr E wrote:
I wish they would do something about the lorries that sit less than 6 feet behind me on the motorway,
6 Feet , Thats quite a distance anyway. How about cars that sit less than that distance then.
6ft is only 2 meters.
[quote][p][bold]red/whitearmy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Mr E[/bold] wrote: I wish they would do something about the lorries that sit less than 6 feet behind me on the motorway,[/p][/quote]6 Feet , Thats quite a distance anyway. How about cars that sit less than that distance then.[/p][/quote]6ft is only 2 meters. Ginger_cyclist
  • Score: 0

7:20pm Mon 28 Apr 14

red/whitearmy says...

I did not think lorries could speed any way with the tachos and speed restrictors.
I did not think lorries could speed any way with the tachos and speed restrictors. red/whitearmy
  • Score: 0

7:32pm Mon 28 Apr 14

Ginger_cyclist says...

red/whitearmy wrote:
I did not think lorries could speed any way with the tachos and speed restrictors.
They CAN speed, here's what .gov.uk says;
National speed limits for goods vehicles with a 7.5Tonne or less maximum laden weight.
30 in built up areas, 50 on single carriageways, 60 on dual carriageways and 70 on motorways unless articulated or towing, then they must do no more than 60 on motorways.

National speed limit for goods vehicles with MORE than 7.5Tonnes of maximum laden weight.
30 in built up areas, 40 on single carriageways, 50 on dual carriageways and 60 on motorways.

As for tachographs and limiters, not all trucks on the road are equiped with them and there are drivers who either ignore them by choice or are told to ignore them.
[quote][p][bold]red/whitearmy[/bold] wrote: I did not think lorries could speed any way with the tachos and speed restrictors.[/p][/quote]They CAN speed, here's what .gov.uk says; National speed limits for goods vehicles with a 7.5Tonne or less maximum laden weight. 30 in built up areas, 50 on single carriageways, 60 on dual carriageways and 70 on motorways unless articulated or towing, then they must do no more than 60 on motorways. National speed limit for goods vehicles with MORE than 7.5Tonnes of maximum laden weight. 30 in built up areas, 40 on single carriageways, 50 on dual carriageways and 60 on motorways. As for tachographs and limiters, not all trucks on the road are equiped with them and there are drivers who either ignore them by choice or are told to ignore them. Ginger_cyclist
  • Score: 3

8:00pm Mon 28 Apr 14

KSO16R says...

The Phantomerer wrote:
KSO16R wrote:
The Phantomerer wrote:
KSO16R wrote:
allstar wrote: Only 3 per cent of car accidents are caused by speeding drivers, Government figures have revealed. Yet there are nearly 7,000 speed cameras across the country which are unable to detect 'careless or reckless' drivers who cause three times as many accidents. Four of the five most frequently reported contributory factors in accidents involved driver or rider error or reaction. Sgt Heard added: “This campaign demonstrates the resolve of police forces across Europe to tackling the issue of speeding. This is just more headline grabbing when the real issues are not being tackled , The police need to focus more on the bad driver instead they go for the easy option.
The risk of driver error increases when speeding and reaction times decrease when driving too fast. Breaking the speed limit is against the law and punishment should be harsher
Wrong. Google for a report entitled: "Speeding Effects on Hazard perception and reaction time." The report suggests that increased speed leads to improved driver focus and, therefore, improved reaction times. Punishment for speeding should not be harsher, punishment for bad driving should be.
'A report suggests' . . . Really : ) what about the other road users ? Take your driving test again and tell the examiner that you will be breaking the speed limits because it helps you focus. Then when you fail don't forget some change for your buss fare home. Laughable if it wasn't for the fact that you are trying to justify breaking the law.
I'm sensing a lot of anger from you and little in the way of sensible argument. I'm guessing you didn't read the report, or you would be able to point out where you consider it to be flawed? Also, please explain where I am attempting to justify criminal behaviour? I am quite open to accepting the report is inaccurate, but you'd better come up with something better than "other road users ?" what does that even mean? It is just hanging there in your response, seemingly disconnected from any cohesive thought you might have managed to conjure up. Your comments about taking a driving test again are just nonsense ramblings, so I'm not even going to bother addressing them.
I did not comment the report being flawed. I didnt need to read it you did that for me. There are other reasons for not speeding besides the risk of RTAs, not least environmental or economical. 'Other road users'?point taken. The driving test retake was supposed to be nonsense. However, the consequences of increased speed are often much more devastating and that you cannot dispute . .
[quote][p][bold]The Phantomerer[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]KSO16R[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]The Phantomerer[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]KSO16R[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]allstar[/bold] wrote: Only 3 per cent of car accidents are caused by speeding drivers, Government figures have revealed. Yet there are nearly 7,000 speed cameras across the country which are unable to detect 'careless or reckless' drivers who cause three times as many accidents. Four of the five most frequently reported contributory factors in accidents involved driver or rider error or reaction. Sgt Heard added: “This campaign demonstrates the resolve of police forces across Europe to tackling the issue of speeding. This is just more headline grabbing when the real issues are not being tackled , The police need to focus more on the bad driver instead they go for the easy option.[/p][/quote]The risk of driver error increases when speeding and reaction times decrease when driving too fast. Breaking the speed limit is against the law and punishment should be harsher[/p][/quote]Wrong. Google for a report entitled: "Speeding Effects on Hazard perception and reaction time." The report suggests that increased speed leads to improved driver focus and, therefore, improved reaction times. Punishment for speeding should not be harsher, punishment for bad driving should be.[/p][/quote]'A report suggests' . . . Really : ) what about the other road users ? Take your driving test again and tell the examiner that you will be breaking the speed limits because it helps you focus. Then when you fail don't forget some change for your buss fare home. Laughable if it wasn't for the fact that you are trying to justify breaking the law.[/p][/quote]I'm sensing a lot of anger from you and little in the way of sensible argument. I'm guessing you didn't read the report, or you would be able to point out where you consider it to be flawed? Also, please explain where I am attempting to justify criminal behaviour? I am quite open to accepting the report is inaccurate, but you'd better come up with something better than "other road users ?" what does that even mean? It is just hanging there in your response, seemingly disconnected from any cohesive thought you might have managed to conjure up. Your comments about taking a driving test again are just nonsense ramblings, so I'm not even going to bother addressing them.[/p][/quote]I did not comment the report being flawed. I didnt need to read it you did that for me. There are other reasons for not speeding besides the risk of RTAs, not least environmental or economical. 'Other road users'?point taken. The driving test retake was supposed to be nonsense. However, the consequences of increased speed are often much more devastating and that you cannot dispute . . KSO16R
  • Score: 0

8:08pm Mon 28 Apr 14

dolomiteman says...

elvisimo wrote:
Bb5061 wrote:
“Our aim is quite simple"- to subsidise Hampshire constabulary with the hard-earned money of struggling, normal people. A great week for Hampshire Constabulary's public relations-NOT! Shame!
so by that logic you should be able to drive along at whatever speed you deem suitable?
If you read the article before ranting there is no mention of any driver being fined, they were warned about their actions and even if the drivers were fined it is their own fault for not obeying the speed limits.
[quote][p][bold]elvisimo[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Bb5061[/bold] wrote: “Our aim is quite simple"- to subsidise Hampshire constabulary with the hard-earned money of struggling, normal people. A great week for Hampshire Constabulary's public relations-NOT! Shame![/p][/quote]so by that logic you should be able to drive along at whatever speed you deem suitable?[/p][/quote]If you read the article before ranting there is no mention of any driver being fined, they were warned about their actions and even if the drivers were fined it is their own fault for not obeying the speed limits. dolomiteman
  • Score: 3

8:24pm Mon 28 Apr 14

The Phantomerer says...

KSO16R wrote:
The Phantomerer wrote:
KSO16R wrote:
The Phantomerer wrote:
KSO16R wrote:
allstar wrote: Only 3 per cent of car accidents are caused by speeding drivers, Government figures have revealed. Yet there are nearly 7,000 speed cameras across the country which are unable to detect 'careless or reckless' drivers who cause three times as many accidents. Four of the five most frequently reported contributory factors in accidents involved driver or rider error or reaction. Sgt Heard added: “This campaign demonstrates the resolve of police forces across Europe to tackling the issue of speeding. This is just more headline grabbing when the real issues are not being tackled , The police need to focus more on the bad driver instead they go for the easy option.
The risk of driver error increases when speeding and reaction times decrease when driving too fast. Breaking the speed limit is against the law and punishment should be harsher
Wrong. Google for a report entitled: "Speeding Effects on Hazard perception and reaction time." The report suggests that increased speed leads to improved driver focus and, therefore, improved reaction times. Punishment for speeding should not be harsher, punishment for bad driving should be.
'A report suggests' . . . Really : ) what about the other road users ? Take your driving test again and tell the examiner that you will be breaking the speed limits because it helps you focus. Then when you fail don't forget some change for your buss fare home. Laughable if it wasn't for the fact that you are trying to justify breaking the law.
I'm sensing a lot of anger from you and little in the way of sensible argument. I'm guessing you didn't read the report, or you would be able to point out where you consider it to be flawed? Also, please explain where I am attempting to justify criminal behaviour? I am quite open to accepting the report is inaccurate, but you'd better come up with something better than "other road users ?" what does that even mean? It is just hanging there in your response, seemingly disconnected from any cohesive thought you might have managed to conjure up. Your comments about taking a driving test again are just nonsense ramblings, so I'm not even going to bother addressing them.
I did not comment the report being flawed. I didnt need to read it you did that for me. There are other reasons for not speeding besides the risk of RTAs, not least environmental or economical. 'Other road users'?point taken. The driving test retake was supposed to be nonsense. However, the consequences of increased speed are often much more devastating and that you cannot dispute . .
No, I certainly cannot dispute that.
[quote][p][bold]KSO16R[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]The Phantomerer[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]KSO16R[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]The Phantomerer[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]KSO16R[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]allstar[/bold] wrote: Only 3 per cent of car accidents are caused by speeding drivers, Government figures have revealed. Yet there are nearly 7,000 speed cameras across the country which are unable to detect 'careless or reckless' drivers who cause three times as many accidents. Four of the five most frequently reported contributory factors in accidents involved driver or rider error or reaction. Sgt Heard added: “This campaign demonstrates the resolve of police forces across Europe to tackling the issue of speeding. This is just more headline grabbing when the real issues are not being tackled , The police need to focus more on the bad driver instead they go for the easy option.[/p][/quote]The risk of driver error increases when speeding and reaction times decrease when driving too fast. Breaking the speed limit is against the law and punishment should be harsher[/p][/quote]Wrong. Google for a report entitled: "Speeding Effects on Hazard perception and reaction time." The report suggests that increased speed leads to improved driver focus and, therefore, improved reaction times. Punishment for speeding should not be harsher, punishment for bad driving should be.[/p][/quote]'A report suggests' . . . Really : ) what about the other road users ? Take your driving test again and tell the examiner that you will be breaking the speed limits because it helps you focus. Then when you fail don't forget some change for your buss fare home. Laughable if it wasn't for the fact that you are trying to justify breaking the law.[/p][/quote]I'm sensing a lot of anger from you and little in the way of sensible argument. I'm guessing you didn't read the report, or you would be able to point out where you consider it to be flawed? Also, please explain where I am attempting to justify criminal behaviour? I am quite open to accepting the report is inaccurate, but you'd better come up with something better than "other road users ?" what does that even mean? It is just hanging there in your response, seemingly disconnected from any cohesive thought you might have managed to conjure up. Your comments about taking a driving test again are just nonsense ramblings, so I'm not even going to bother addressing them.[/p][/quote]I did not comment the report being flawed. I didnt need to read it you did that for me. There are other reasons for not speeding besides the risk of RTAs, not least environmental or economical. 'Other road users'?point taken. The driving test retake was supposed to be nonsense. However, the consequences of increased speed are often much more devastating and that you cannot dispute . .[/p][/quote]No, I certainly cannot dispute that. The Phantomerer
  • Score: 0

8:38pm Mon 28 Apr 14

Bb5061 says...

dolomiteman wrote:
elvisimo wrote:
Bb5061 wrote:
“Our aim is quite simple"- to subsidise Hampshire constabulary with the hard-earned money of struggling, normal people. A great week for Hampshire Constabulary's public relations-NOT! Shame!
so by that logic you should be able to drive along at whatever speed you deem suitable?
If you read the article before ranting there is no mention of any driver being fined, they were warned about their actions and even if the drivers were fined it is their own fault for not obeying the speed limits.
This 'week of action' is just the tip of a much larger culture of penalizing the motorist with fines! No mention of fines in this article, does not necessarily imply that fines were not issued, and if they weren't it would certainly be a first! What's more, expressing an opinion is not 'ranting'.
[quote][p][bold]dolomiteman[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]elvisimo[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Bb5061[/bold] wrote: “Our aim is quite simple"- to subsidise Hampshire constabulary with the hard-earned money of struggling, normal people. A great week for Hampshire Constabulary's public relations-NOT! Shame![/p][/quote]so by that logic you should be able to drive along at whatever speed you deem suitable?[/p][/quote]If you read the article before ranting there is no mention of any driver being fined, they were warned about their actions and even if the drivers were fined it is their own fault for not obeying the speed limits.[/p][/quote]This 'week of action' is just the tip of a much larger culture of penalizing the motorist with fines! No mention of fines in this article, does not necessarily imply that fines were not issued, and if they weren't it would certainly be a first! What's more, expressing an opinion is not 'ranting'. Bb5061
  • Score: 1

9:54pm Mon 28 Apr 14

Charlie Bucket says...

Stubs wrote:
Speed kills.
Given that the overwhelming majority of spending incidents does not result in an accident, I think we can write this off as nonsense.
[quote][p][bold]Stubs[/bold] wrote: Speed kills.[/p][/quote]Given that the overwhelming majority of spending incidents does not result in an accident, I think we can write this off as nonsense. Charlie Bucket
  • Score: -3

9:55pm Mon 28 Apr 14

Ginger_cyclist says...

Charlie Bucket wrote:
Stubs wrote:
Speed kills.
Given that the overwhelming majority of spending incidents does not result in an accident, I think we can write this off as nonsense.
I've never heard of SPENDING, resulting in accidents, I've heard of SPEEDING causing them though.
[quote][p][bold]Charlie Bucket[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Stubs[/bold] wrote: Speed kills.[/p][/quote]Given that the overwhelming majority of spending incidents does not result in an accident, I think we can write this off as nonsense.[/p][/quote]I've never heard of SPENDING, resulting in accidents, I've heard of SPEEDING causing them though. Ginger_cyclist
  • Score: 1

10:17pm Mon 28 Apr 14

IronLady2010 says...

It would be interesting to see on what type of Roads the speed limits were breached.

I recently hired a Van which had a 60 mph speed restriction, now whilst it cuts off any further acceleration, going down hill you can still pick up speed and exceed the limit.

Sometimes if you apply these 'Nanny' rules people will assume they are legal.
It would be interesting to see on what type of Roads the speed limits were breached. I recently hired a Van which had a 60 mph speed restriction, now whilst it cuts off any further acceleration, going down hill you can still pick up speed and exceed the limit. Sometimes if you apply these 'Nanny' rules people will assume they are legal. IronLady2010
  • Score: 0

10:54pm Mon 28 Apr 14

Niel says...

As a regular user of the A272/A32 I'm not surprised they've caught a load of speeding truckers, as others have noted the speed limit for a truck there is 40 mph, doing the legal limit for my car or motorcycle (50 mph section) I get tailgated by the Medina Dairy loons in their arctics. So much as I hate the over emphasis on unthinking speed enforcement, perhaps TISPOL's Euro-wide efforts are to be applauded in this case, though I'd much rather have proper TRAFFIC Police officers patrolling and stopping bad drivers in general.
As a regular user of the A272/A32 I'm not surprised they've caught a load of speeding truckers, as others have noted the speed limit for a truck there is 40 mph, doing the legal limit for my car or motorcycle (50 mph section) I get tailgated by the Medina Dairy loons in their arctics. So much as I hate the over emphasis on unthinking speed enforcement, perhaps TISPOL's Euro-wide efforts are to be applauded in this case, though I'd much rather have proper TRAFFIC Police officers patrolling and stopping bad drivers in general. Niel
  • Score: 3

6:40am Tue 29 Apr 14

Georgethepie says...

Mr E wrote:
I wish they would do something about the lorries that sit less than 6 feet behind me on the motorway,
If your doing 56 or more a lorry should never catch you. Hence you might want to ask the question what's more important your fuel consumption or safety.
[quote][p][bold]Mr E[/bold] wrote: I wish they would do something about the lorries that sit less than 6 feet behind me on the motorway,[/p][/quote]If your doing 56 or more a lorry should never catch you. Hence you might want to ask the question what's more important your fuel consumption or safety. Georgethepie
  • Score: 1

6:47am Tue 29 Apr 14

Georgethepie says...

Ginger_cyclist wrote:
red/whitearmy wrote:
I did not think lorries could speed any way with the tachos and speed restrictors.
They CAN speed, here's what .gov.uk says;
National speed limits for goods vehicles with a 7.5Tonne or less maximum laden weight.
30 in built up areas, 50 on single carriageways, 60 on dual carriageways and 70 on motorways unless articulated or towing, then they must do no more than 60 on motorways.

National speed limit for goods vehicles with MORE than 7.5Tonnes of maximum laden weight.
30 in built up areas, 40 on single carriageways, 50 on dual carriageways and 60 on motorways.

As for tachographs and limiters, not all trucks on the road are equiped with them and there are drivers who either ignore them by choice or are told to ignore them.
Come on then Mr cyclist which trucks are not fitted with Tachos and limiters
[quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]red/whitearmy[/bold] wrote: I did not think lorries could speed any way with the tachos and speed restrictors.[/p][/quote]They CAN speed, here's what .gov.uk says; National speed limits for goods vehicles with a 7.5Tonne or less maximum laden weight. 30 in built up areas, 50 on single carriageways, 60 on dual carriageways and 70 on motorways unless articulated or towing, then they must do no more than 60 on motorways. National speed limit for goods vehicles with MORE than 7.5Tonnes of maximum laden weight. 30 in built up areas, 40 on single carriageways, 50 on dual carriageways and 60 on motorways. As for tachographs and limiters, not all trucks on the road are equiped with them and there are drivers who either ignore them by choice or are told to ignore them.[/p][/quote]Come on then Mr cyclist which trucks are not fitted with Tachos and limiters Georgethepie
  • Score: -3

7:06am Tue 29 Apr 14

skeptik says...

One fine day in Germany (BAOR) 1970s making my way home to the married quarter in a 220D taxi, pootling along at a fair old lick, the driver said look, I turned to see the majestic sight of a Rolls Royce Corniche - it whistled by with a woosh - he looked and shrugged his shoulders - we discussed fuel consumption. That was one fast lorry!
One fine day in Germany (BAOR) 1970s making my way home to the married quarter in a 220D taxi, pootling along at a fair old lick, the driver said look, I turned to see the majestic sight of a Rolls Royce Corniche - it whistled by with a woosh - he looked and shrugged his shoulders - we discussed fuel consumption. That was one fast lorry! skeptik
  • Score: 0

8:42am Tue 29 Apr 14

rightway says...

Anyone caught speeding three times should have the vehicle they’re driving confiscated and crushed.
For all the experts, more people are seriously injured in accidents at speed, no matter what the cause, that when going slow.
Anyone caught speeding three times should have the vehicle they’re driving confiscated and crushed. For all the experts, more people are seriously injured in accidents at speed, no matter what the cause, that when going slow. rightway
  • Score: -1

8:50am Tue 29 Apr 14

AndyVD says...

Mr E wrote:
I wish they would do something about the lorries that sit less than 6 feet behind me on the motorway,
I do tens of thousands of miles a year in my car and its people like you who annoy me as a road user. Its very clear you are either a new driver (who quite frankly they aren't taught enough before being allowed to drive alone!), or just an incapable one.

The speed limit for cars on the motorway is 70mph unless stated otherwise by a permanent sign or variable speed limit with a red circle. Speed limits shown with flashy yellow lights are only advisory and are not legally enforced, however if you are being a tool about it, I'm sure the police will pull you anyway.

The national speed limit for cars on a dual carriageway is 70mph when stated with a white circle with a diagonal black line.

The national speed limit for cars on a single carriageway is 60mph when stated with a white circle with a diagonal black line.

There is no excuse for a truck to be on your rear, or to even over take you. Learn how to do the speed limit or get off the road in my opinion as you are more of a hazard than a truck on your backside.
[quote][p][bold]Mr E[/bold] wrote: I wish they would do something about the lorries that sit less than 6 feet behind me on the motorway,[/p][/quote]I do tens of thousands of miles a year in my car and its people like you who annoy me as a road user. Its very clear you are either a new driver (who quite frankly they aren't taught enough before being allowed to drive alone!), or just an incapable one. The speed limit for cars on the motorway is 70mph unless stated otherwise by a permanent sign or variable speed limit with a red circle. Speed limits shown with flashy yellow lights are only advisory and are not legally enforced, however if you are being a tool about it, I'm sure the police will pull you anyway. The national speed limit for cars on a dual carriageway is 70mph when stated with a white circle with a diagonal black line. The national speed limit for cars on a single carriageway is 60mph when stated with a white circle with a diagonal black line. There is no excuse for a truck to be on your rear, or to even over take you. Learn how to do the speed limit or get off the road in my opinion as you are more of a hazard than a truck on your backside. AndyVD
  • Score: 4

9:00am Tue 29 Apr 14

Charlie Bucket says...

AndyVD wrote:
Mr E wrote:
I wish they would do something about the lorries that sit less than 6 feet behind me on the motorway,
I do tens of thousands of miles a year in my car and its people like you who annoy me as a road user. Its very clear you are either a new driver (who quite frankly they aren't taught enough before being allowed to drive alone!), or just an incapable one.

The speed limit for cars on the motorway is 70mph unless stated otherwise by a permanent sign or variable speed limit with a red circle. Speed limits shown with flashy yellow lights are only advisory and are not legally enforced, however if you are being a tool about it, I'm sure the police will pull you anyway.

The national speed limit for cars on a dual carriageway is 70mph when stated with a white circle with a diagonal black line.

The national speed limit for cars on a single carriageway is 60mph when stated with a white circle with a diagonal black line.

There is no excuse for a truck to be on your rear, or to even over take you. Learn how to do the speed limit or get off the road in my opinion as you are more of a hazard than a truck on your backside.
+1 in fact the offence of failing to make reasonable progress exists precisely for guys like Captain Slow above.
[quote][p][bold]AndyVD[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Mr E[/bold] wrote: I wish they would do something about the lorries that sit less than 6 feet behind me on the motorway,[/p][/quote]I do tens of thousands of miles a year in my car and its people like you who annoy me as a road user. Its very clear you are either a new driver (who quite frankly they aren't taught enough before being allowed to drive alone!), or just an incapable one. The speed limit for cars on the motorway is 70mph unless stated otherwise by a permanent sign or variable speed limit with a red circle. Speed limits shown with flashy yellow lights are only advisory and are not legally enforced, however if you are being a tool about it, I'm sure the police will pull you anyway. The national speed limit for cars on a dual carriageway is 70mph when stated with a white circle with a diagonal black line. The national speed limit for cars on a single carriageway is 60mph when stated with a white circle with a diagonal black line. There is no excuse for a truck to be on your rear, or to even over take you. Learn how to do the speed limit or get off the road in my opinion as you are more of a hazard than a truck on your backside.[/p][/quote]+1 in fact the offence of failing to make reasonable progress exists precisely for guys like Captain Slow above. Charlie Bucket
  • Score: 5

9:17am Tue 29 Apr 14

tootle says...

"There is no excuse for a truck to be on your rear, or to even over take you. Learn how to do the speed limit or get off the road in my opinion as you are more of a hazard than a truck on your backside." Driving out there is manic. People break the speed limit all the time. Then they screech round you whether it is safe or not. Where are the police - generally hitting the motorist somewhere where they KNOW they will be speeding. If you have an accident when moving fast it is more likely somebody will be dead but it is generally drivor, cyclist, pedestrian error that causes the accident not the speed. Where are the police when they should be there.

Let's see, recently. There's the driver that overtook me at speed when we were both turning left at a local roundabout - I was going slowly because I knew the road and couldn't see around the delivery lorry parked half on the pavement across the corner. Nor could the other driver but he should have seen my brakelights. Then there was the cyclist who held a queue of cars up because he was turning right by riding in the correct safe manner. Fair enough, except when he got to the by then red traffic lights he just went straight across the lights without stopping. Then there was the old man who quite obviously was never going to make it with the green man on and so decided starting off with the lights showing green was the best option. Then there was the guy who was quite shocked that he nearly ran me down on a local pavement, what was i doing there - walking, he was on a moped(and no he wasn't pulling across the the pavement, he was in a pedestrianised area!) No police anywhere. Fortunately no police when I make mistakes either but ....................
............
"There is no excuse for a truck to be on your rear, or to even over take you. Learn how to do the speed limit or get off the road in my opinion as you are more of a hazard than a truck on your backside." Driving out there is manic. People break the speed limit all the time. Then they screech round you whether it is safe or not. Where are the police - generally hitting the motorist somewhere where they KNOW they will be speeding. If you have an accident when moving fast it is more likely somebody will be dead but it is generally drivor, cyclist, pedestrian error that causes the accident not the speed. Where are the police when they should be there. Let's see, recently. There's the driver that overtook me at speed when we were both turning left at a local roundabout - I was going slowly because I knew the road and couldn't see around the delivery lorry parked half on the pavement across the corner. Nor could the other driver but he should have seen my brakelights. Then there was the cyclist who held a queue of cars up because he was turning right by riding in the correct safe manner. Fair enough, except when he got to the by then red traffic lights he just went straight across the lights without stopping. Then there was the old man who quite obviously was never going to make it with the green man on and so decided starting off with the lights showing green was the best option. Then there was the guy who was quite shocked that he nearly ran me down on a local pavement, what was i doing there - walking, he was on a moped(and no he wasn't pulling across the the pavement, he was in a pedestrianised area!) No police anywhere. Fortunately no police when I make mistakes either but .................... ............ tootle
  • Score: -1

10:12am Tue 29 Apr 14

one in a million says...

Time to install telematics devices on all vehicles this would stop speeding and dangerous driving for ever.
Time to install telematics devices on all vehicles this would stop speeding and dangerous driving for ever. one in a million
  • Score: 1

10:23am Tue 29 Apr 14

Charlie Bucket says...

Ginger_cyclist wrote:
Charlie Bucket wrote:
Stubs wrote:
Speed kills.
Given that the overwhelming majority of spending incidents does not result in an accident, I think we can write this off as nonsense.
I've never heard of SPENDING, resulting in accidents, I've heard of SPEEDING causing them though.
Hahaha whoops. I meant speeding, of course.
[quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Charlie Bucket[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Stubs[/bold] wrote: Speed kills.[/p][/quote]Given that the overwhelming majority of spending incidents does not result in an accident, I think we can write this off as nonsense.[/p][/quote]I've never heard of SPENDING, resulting in accidents, I've heard of SPEEDING causing them though.[/p][/quote]Hahaha whoops. I meant speeding, of course. Charlie Bucket
  • Score: 1

10:23am Tue 29 Apr 14

Charlie Bucket says...

Ginger_cyclist wrote:
Charlie Bucket wrote:
Stubs wrote:
Speed kills.
Given that the overwhelming majority of spending incidents does not result in an accident, I think we can write this off as nonsense.
I've never heard of SPENDING, resulting in accidents, I've heard of SPEEDING causing them though.
Hahaha whoops. I meant speeding, of course.
[quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Charlie Bucket[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Stubs[/bold] wrote: Speed kills.[/p][/quote]Given that the overwhelming majority of spending incidents does not result in an accident, I think we can write this off as nonsense.[/p][/quote]I've never heard of SPENDING, resulting in accidents, I've heard of SPEEDING causing them though.[/p][/quote]Hahaha whoops. I meant speeding, of course. Charlie Bucket
  • Score: 1

10:25am Tue 29 Apr 14

Charlie Bucket says...

rightway wrote:
Anyone caught speeding three times should have the vehicle they’re driving confiscated and crushed.
For all the experts, more people are seriously injured in accidents at speed, no matter what the cause, that when going slow.
What if it's not their vehicle, as will often be the case with lorries? Why should I, as a haulier, have my vehicle crushed because of what a driver did?
[quote][p][bold]rightway[/bold] wrote: Anyone caught speeding three times should have the vehicle they’re driving confiscated and crushed. For all the experts, more people are seriously injured in accidents at speed, no matter what the cause, that when going slow.[/p][/quote]What if it's not their vehicle, as will often be the case with lorries? Why should I, as a haulier, have my vehicle crushed because of what a driver did? Charlie Bucket
  • Score: 2

10:34am Tue 29 Apr 14

Charlie Bucket says...

one in a million wrote:
Time to install telematics devices on all vehicles this would stop speeding and dangerous driving for ever.
Or perhaps we need to focus on taking control away from the drivers, so that speeding is not such an issue. In fact, we are already doing so.
[quote][p][bold]one in a million[/bold] wrote: Time to install telematics devices on all vehicles this would stop speeding and dangerous driving for ever.[/p][/quote]Or perhaps we need to focus on taking control away from the drivers, so that speeding is not such an issue. In fact, we are already doing so. Charlie Bucket
  • Score: -1

11:06am Tue 29 Apr 14

From the sidelines says...

Stubs wrote:
Speed kills.
The roads with the fastest traffic (motorways) are the safest.
[quote][p][bold]Stubs[/bold] wrote: Speed kills.[/p][/quote]The roads with the fastest traffic (motorways) are the safest. From the sidelines
  • Score: 0

12:02pm Tue 29 Apr 14

good-gosh says...

We could licence drivers in three categories – Dunce Class for the average nitwit who needs to obey every rule to the letter for his and others safety; Trying Hard Class for the well-intended but occasionally silly – who are allowed a bit of leniency; and Superior Class who can do whatever they like – dependable in every respect and given freedom from all speed limits.
We could licence drivers in three categories – Dunce Class for the average nitwit who needs to obey every rule to the letter for his and others safety; Trying Hard Class for the well-intended but occasionally silly – who are allowed a bit of leniency; and Superior Class who can do whatever they like – dependable in every respect and given freedom from all speed limits. good-gosh
  • Score: 1

1:17pm Tue 29 Apr 14

Suntanned Snowman says...

"Drivers pulled over by the police were warned of the dangers caused by lorries travelling too fast. "

It appears, unless the Echo has it wrong, that none of the drivers was prosecuted. The police couldn't have believed that speeding was that dangerous then!
"Drivers pulled over by the police were warned of the dangers caused by lorries travelling too fast. " It appears, unless the Echo has it wrong, that none of the drivers was prosecuted. The police couldn't have believed that speeding was that dangerous then! Suntanned Snowman
  • Score: 0

5:06pm Tue 29 Apr 14

Hedgendman says...

Tye-Dye pt2 wrote:
Mr E wrote:
I wish they would do something about the lorries that sit less than 6 feet behind me on the motorway,
Mr E, with all due respect HGV's are limited to 55mph and are only allowed to do that speed on motorways, the simple course of action for you to take is to speed up to 60/65 mph for a couple of miles and he will be a distant blur in your rear view mirror.
Limited to 55mph? That's not all of them is it though?! Otherwise how do I struggle to go past at 70 today traveling north on the M6 just north of Carlisle.
[quote][p][bold]Tye-Dye pt2[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Mr E[/bold] wrote: I wish they would do something about the lorries that sit less than 6 feet behind me on the motorway,[/p][/quote]Mr E, with all due respect HGV's are limited to 55mph and are only allowed to do that speed on motorways, the simple course of action for you to take is to speed up to 60/65 mph for a couple of miles and he will be a distant blur in your rear view mirror.[/p][/quote]Limited to 55mph? That's not all of them is it though?! Otherwise how do I struggle to go past at 70 today traveling north on the M6 just north of Carlisle. Hedgendman
  • Score: 0

5:19pm Tue 29 Apr 14

Hedgendman says...

I like the idea of graduated licenses.

Provisional
Full
Advanced.

I used to think I was a good driver, but had an accident which was my fault because I was being cocky. I then looked for advanced driving. I found the Institute of Advanced Motorists (IAM). Since joining and passing my advanced test I feel very competent. It would be nice to be allowed to travel faster though ;-)

Also I feel tests every 2 years would be beneficial.
I like the idea of graduated licenses. Provisional Full Advanced. I used to think I was a good driver, but had an accident which was my fault because I was being cocky. I then looked for advanced driving. I found the Institute of Advanced Motorists (IAM). Since joining and passing my advanced test I feel very competent. It would be nice to be allowed to travel faster though ;-) Also I feel tests every 2 years would be beneficial. Hedgendman
  • Score: 0

6:01pm Tue 29 Apr 14

Ginger_cyclist says...

Georgethepie wrote:
Ginger_cyclist wrote:
red/whitearmy wrote:
I did not think lorries could speed any way with the tachos and speed restrictors.
They CAN speed, here's what .gov.uk says;
National speed limits for goods vehicles with a 7.5Tonne or less maximum laden weight.
30 in built up areas, 50 on single carriageways, 60 on dual carriageways and 70 on motorways unless articulated or towing, then they must do no more than 60 on motorways.

National speed limit for goods vehicles with MORE than 7.5Tonnes of maximum laden weight.
30 in built up areas, 40 on single carriageways, 50 on dual carriageways and 60 on motorways.

As for tachographs and limiters, not all trucks on the road are equiped with them and there are drivers who either ignore them by choice or are told to ignore them.
Come on then Mr cyclist which trucks are not fitted with Tachos and limiters
I'd hazard a guess that older trucks and those used by the circus and fun fairs might not be fitted with them, could be wrong though but I should think it's very rare these days to find a truck that doesn't have them fitted.
[quote][p][bold]Georgethepie[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]red/whitearmy[/bold] wrote: I did not think lorries could speed any way with the tachos and speed restrictors.[/p][/quote]They CAN speed, here's what .gov.uk says; National speed limits for goods vehicles with a 7.5Tonne or less maximum laden weight. 30 in built up areas, 50 on single carriageways, 60 on dual carriageways and 70 on motorways unless articulated or towing, then they must do no more than 60 on motorways. National speed limit for goods vehicles with MORE than 7.5Tonnes of maximum laden weight. 30 in built up areas, 40 on single carriageways, 50 on dual carriageways and 60 on motorways. As for tachographs and limiters, not all trucks on the road are equiped with them and there are drivers who either ignore them by choice or are told to ignore them.[/p][/quote]Come on then Mr cyclist which trucks are not fitted with Tachos and limiters[/p][/quote]I'd hazard a guess that older trucks and those used by the circus and fun fairs might not be fitted with them, could be wrong though but I should think it's very rare these days to find a truck that doesn't have them fitted. Ginger_cyclist
  • Score: 0

6:20pm Tue 29 Apr 14

bullsbags says...

Get more freight back on the railways and less HGVS on the roads
Get more freight back on the railways and less HGVS on the roads bullsbags
  • Score: 0

Comments are closed on this article.

Send us your news, pictures and videos

Most read stories

Local Info

Enter your postcode, town or place name

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree