You make a blanket assumption that because something is a law it automatically qualifies as meritorious. That’s how authoritarianism creeps up on us.
2 Likes
No @JohnH1 you’re not alone. But it’s hard to speak out, because it can get misinterpreted as pro speeding. Which I’m sure you, like me, wouldn’t condone. Contrary to what some have said, it’s not on a criminal par with burglary. That’s a deliberate decision to do something bad, whereas going on some of our gradients at less than 20mph is bloody difficult without looking at the speedometer so intently as to be to the detriment of scanning the road for the actions of the reckless and other hazards. In those circumstances it’s all too easy to slip a tad over 20mph.
Now I shall duck for incoming.
7 Likes
I’m 50 years old. I’ve been driving for 33 years. I was involved in one minor collision, which was my fault, when I was 18 (less than a year after passing my test). That was in 1990. I’ve never been involved in a RTC since. I always drive at less than 30mph on local roads. I recently received a FPN for driving at 26mph in SE23. The “offence” took place at 1am on a week night, when there were no other road users (cars, pedestrians or cyclists) around. Do you believe I posed a danger to others? Or do you think it might more nuanced than that?
In other areas outside Lewisham, the “law” might be that the maximum speed on a similar road is 30mph. Which law is correct? Would I be wrong or right to be driving at 26mph on that road? Would I be a danger or not a danger to others by driving at 26mph on that road?
3 Likes
Thanks Mary, at least I won’t be the only one who’s “cancelled”.
1 Like
But in your last post to me you suggested it would be wrong to equip oneself even for use if one simply came across a wrongdoer. Which is it?
Both. To me your downloading of the app signifies your intent to actively seek out wrongdoers and I think it is most improbable that you can “by chance” hear a speeding car, fish your phone out of your pocket, turn it on, open up the app and video said car because at just 30mph that car will have travelled 1/4 mile in the, let’s say, minimum 30 seconds it takes you to do that.
Be careful John you might crack the echo chamber…
it takes me 2 seconds to take my phone out of my pocket and double tap ‘PWR’ to load whatever app I have set my phone up to load. Does this convince you that one might be able to use the app passively (as opposed to actively seeking out wrongdoers)?
For some context: the latest traffic stats indicated that more than 1 in 100 of the vehicles travelling down Woolstone Road do at over 40mph and more than 1 in 1000 travel at more than 50mph.
1 Like
Yes speeding can be dangerous. But if you drop the speed limit too much (like 20) it actually creates dangerous air pollution!
Also the speed limit on London is now disconnected from the appropriate speed. An area that is only safe to go 10 has a the same limit as an area where 40 is just as safe (often safer as there are roads in FH that have barriers on both sides that are 20)
1 Like
I really don’t consider a “snitch” culture, in which we’re all encouraged to grass each other up, to be a mark of a “civil society”. Rather, it divides us further, gets us working against each other. It concerns me immensely that people can’t see the bigger picture of how division is used by states as a form of control. Divide and conquer, remember that? You may be led to believe that you’re being a praiseworthy “good citizen” by snooping and snitching on your neighbour, but the primary goal of a system of social hyper surveillance is to use “good citizens” as tools to do the work of the state and ensure that everyone toes the party line. Once we usher such a system in, it’s a slippery slope.
2 Likes
How prey tell are you or Mary being ‘cancelled’? There are opposing view points on this thread with supporters for all sides. You can continue to put forward your points as and how you wish.
5 Likes
wanton and furious cycling
I don’t think there is such a thing as that.
I believe it comes from Causing bodily harm by wanton or furious driving
This offence is created by section 35 of the Offences against the Person Act 1861 (drivers of carriages injuring persons by furious driving):
“Whosoever, having the charge of any carriage or vehicle, shall by wanton or furious driving or racing, or other wilful misconduct, or by wilful neglect, do or cause to be done any bodily harm to any person whatsoever, shall be guilty of a misdemeanor, and being convicted thereof shall be liable, at the discretion of the court, to be imprisoned for any term not exceeding two years …”
It has been used to prosecute a cyclist in 2009.
Although as someone who has been arrested for “Riding a pushbike without due care and attention” or some such thing, I do know there are specific laws for people on bikes
Umm I have no real views on the minutiae of your speeding or driving tbh. Just stay within the speed limit.
Why do some drivers react like whiny children when asked to obey the rules of the road.
4 Likes
I’ve gotten so confused by this topic.
There seems to be tacit agreement that speeding in general is bad. But it is isn’t bad when some people do it because they personally know that the speed limit applied for that bit of road at that time of day is wrong, therefore speeding is okay. But while other speeding is bad, it is bad for people in the community to proactively do something about it as we will be in danger of becoming Hungary.
The world’s gone 
8 Likes
I would also note that there is a huge difference between 20 mph and 40 mph if you are say, unfortunate enough to hit a pedestrian or another car.
1 Like
Most cyclists are reasonable enough to realise that speeding can be dangerous to other road users and limits your ability to stop for unpredictable and predictable hazards and a bike hitting a pedestrian at 30mph isn’t going to be pleasant. The same people who speed often cycle and drive. They aren’t cycle angels and car devils.
The police and councils have to work really hard to stop dangerous cycling and often take the pragmatic approach of banning cycling such as in Greenwich or Eastbourne seafront punishing us all for the transgressions of the few. It would be better to have more laws against cyclists to make it better for the majority rather than let people away who give us a bad name and stop the constant lack of equality in the eyes of the law arguments.
I would agree with @JohnH1 and Mary that we don’t want Forest Hill to be turned into the valley of the squinting windows. I don’t think the Police do either as their current burden of proof for a video submission is 1 minute before and 1 minute after the incident occurred so even if you manage to start videoing in 2 seconds, you would have to speed to keep up with your speeder for 2 minutes.
3 Likes
I admit I do tend to be a bit millitant about speeding.
I grew up with an A road running among side our farm. People used to speed along it and we lost a couple of dogs.
I also, walking round a field very early one morning with my dad, came across the aftermath of an accident where a speeding car full of young people (the subsequent investigation found they were doing 90mph) skidded off the road and down the side of a steep bank.
The interior of that car is not something I would want any one to have seen.
I think there’s definitely a case to be made for the locally set borough wide 20mph limits to be applied to all carriages - which would include cycles and escooters - not just motorised. The national limits may not apply to cyclists, but I can’t imagine many go faster than 30mph anyway. Although that said, I did get undertaken by a cyclist downhill on CP Road when I was going just a tad under 30 and he much faster than the cars. But he was all kitted out for racing and was seemingly oblivious to all else. I think I’d call it furious cycling 
No, it’s called the rule of law, Chris.
Hi Andy, nice to meet you, my name’s not Chris.