Speeding drivers in London to be targeted as 2019 casualty figures published

Captain Badger wrote:

Speed is always a contributory factor. Lower speeds result in lower chance of a collision in the first place, and where it does happen less serious outcomes for those involved.

With the above in mind, it is ludicrous that cars are permitted to be built and marketed to be capable of excessive speed and power.

Suggest that all vehicles are limited to a max of 70mph and feel the derision and hate come at you from all sides despite they all being law abiding motorists etc and so on. We've had the technology to do this since the year dot yet it will never happen ...though an MP did suggest a network of automatic speed limiters for electric scooters a while back even before they had been involved in any serious collisions.

Indeed.

I'm just waiting for some numpty to go "but but but but .. whwhwhhat if I want to drive faster than that in Germany....?"

It's all a game of chance - that innocent motorist bit of speeding had no material consequence, so was ok - this time - that's  until your luck - or that of some other innocent soul runs out. 
I've have thought satellite technology could already be used for this purpose? But as you say, the choice is largely to turn a blind eye. 

Nah, no one would not be up to have a limiter set at the fastest limit allowed in the UK and then moan because they might occaisionally go to another country once in a blue moon. Next you will be telling me they moan about exhaust gases in certain cases, yet want to drive at speeds which burn fuel alot faster rather then go at a limit which is most efficient on fuel and lower on emissions when safe to do so. 

Next you will be telling me that they argue that all cars should go as fast and as short a route as possible but argue bikes should be slow, stop and start, and only go certain places at certain times. Sounds like a bridge dweller to me. 

Like this?

Yeah, now you put it like that.

Feel a bit silly now....

Captain Badger wrote:

Speed is always a contributory factor.

I agree that excess speed (i.e. for the conditions, which is not the same as travelling above the legal limit) is a contributory factor in many collisions. Speeding drivers are risk-takers who think the rules don't apply to them; they are willing to drive too close to the limits of the conditions, leaving little room for error or something they had not expected. In my youth I drove like that for a little while. I'm not proud of it, but thankfully I caused no physical harm to anyone (which sadly was not the case for a number of other young lads I knew).

But there may be circumstances when speed is not a real factor e.g. if someone pulls out on you. SMIDSY is a perennial problem, especially where there are multiple factors a driver's attention such as roundabouts and complex junctions.

We've all done it. Well, I know I have, as you say, I'm not proud of some of my early driving days. 

Where I'm coming from is that in any situation, risk and severity of outcome reduce with speed, and vice versa. Whereas attention, phones, distractions in and out of the vehicle, conditions, experience et al are key factors also, there is no situation that I can think of where the above is not the case. The usual "but" comes on the motorway, however my approach to motorways is that people break down, loads get shed, people need to slow down for all kinds of reasons, and following drivers need to be aware of that and drive accordingly - my old favourite you must be able to stop safely and under control in the distance you can see to be clear.

As you mention in your last paragraph there may be multiple factors in complex situations such as junctions, my response is to  slow to a speed where I can process incoming data satisfactorily, and proceed with caution ('nother one of my favourite cliches)