Anti going too fast campaign New Zealand

  • Page

    of 1

    Previous Next
  • Menace 10 Jan 2014 15:27:07 5,742 posts
    Seen 5 hours ago
    Registered 11 years ago


    I just watched this, and as a non-car person I have a hard time understanding why cars are 'allowed' to be able to travel faster than the fastest speed limits. I know that there's places in Germany where you're allowed to drive really fast, but I'd argue that in most cases there's no real need for cars to be able to drive that fast..

    So, any good arguments in favour of standard cars being able/allowed to drive faster than the rules permit?

    In my opinion you should rent a race track if you want to drive fast, just like you rent time at an ice-rink if you want to play icehockey..

    Please excuse my bad English, I'm struggling a bit with wording it right..

    www.bigbitegames.com/soccer

  • Salaman 10 Jan 2014 15:31:37 18,959 posts
    Seen 16 hours ago
    Registered 10 years ago
    Simple example from the clip you linked to.
    He's on a rural road. Speed limit is probably 70 km/h or 90km/h but he's going 110.
    Should his car not be allowed to go faster than 90 km/h then? Well no. There's also motorways where you're allowed to go 120 or 130, depending on the country (or unlimited if you're on certain sections of German motorways).

    Cars are limited though .... to 250 km/h usually.
  • phAge 10 Jan 2014 15:35:21 24,348 posts
    Seen 5 hours ago
    Registered 11 years ago
    If cars couldn't go faster than the maximum speed limit (which, as already pointed out, varies a lot, both locally and globally) you'd find overtaking at max speed pretty damn hard and slow - which would also make it dangerous.
  • TheSaint 10 Jan 2014 15:39:08 14,303 posts
    Seen 5 hours ago
    Registered 9 years ago
    It would be a road full of lorries. What a nightmare.
  • SwissEvans 10 Jan 2014 15:52:27 96 posts
    Seen 2 days ago
    Registered 8 months ago
    Can understand the logic, but as others have said, it can be dangerous not to have the power when you need it. To get out of trouble overtaking etc. Its just put down to personal accountability. Dont drive like a dick. Sadly, people will be dicks.

    Not to change the topic slightly but it sort of links my brain to this...

    One thing i dont get is why the government spends so much money on helping people quit, making it harder to buy cigarettes, making them more expensive, hiding them in shops, forcing them to have plain branding. When they could just make them illegal? Just seems really disingenuous they make such a big deal about how bad it is, yet let it go on.

    Realise they make tonnes of money from taxing it, probably more than they spend treating im guessing and why they let it carry on. Put on a public face of how much you seem to care, secretly rubbing hands together as theyre pocketing the money from the tax on them.

    I couldnt give a shit either way, just confuses me the way the government says one thing, and does another (nothing new i know)

    Edited by SwissEvans at 15:53:08 10-01-2014
  • Menace 10 Jan 2014 15:54:23 5,742 posts
    Seen 5 hours ago
    Registered 11 years ago
    But if the car in front of you is going at max speed there's no reason you should be overtaking them in the first place.

    www.bigbitegames.com/soccer

  • phAge 10 Jan 2014 16:04:18 24,348 posts
    Seen 5 hours ago
    Registered 11 years ago
    SwissEvans wrote:
    Can understand the logic, but as others have said, it can be dangerous not to have the power when you need it. To get out of trouble overtaking etc. Its just put down to personal accountability. Dont drive like a dick. Sadly, people will be dicks.

    Not to change the topic slightly but it sort of links my brain to this...

    One thing i dont get is why the government spends so much money on helping people quit, making it harder to buy cigarettes, making them more expensive, hiding them in shops, forcing them to have plain branding. When they could just make them illegal? Just seems really disingenuous they make such a big deal about how bad it is, yet let it go on.

    Realise they make tonnes of money from taxing it, probably more than they spend treating im guessing and why they let it carry on. Put on a public face of how much you seem to care, secretly rubbing hands together as theyre pocketing the money from the tax on them.

    I couldnt give a shit either way, just confuses me the way the government says one thing, and does another (nothing new i know)
    Well, there is the idea of personal liberty involved. If you wanna make smoking illegal, drinking is a prime candidate as well - same goes jor junkfood and any and all activities which are unhealthy and/or dangerous to the individual.
  • PazJohnMitch 10 Jan 2014 16:15:25 8,006 posts
    Seen 5 hours ago
    Registered 7 years ago
    Governments do not want to ban cigarettes and alcohol as they like the tax revenues from them.

    In the UK I see no reason for a car to be able to travel over 100mph.

    I can understand unrestricted sections of motorways but only in countries which have very straight, empty roads that pedestrians can not stumble across.
  • billythekid 10 Jan 2014 16:20:17 11,107 posts
    Seen 11 hours ago
    Registered 9 years ago
    How would you ever escape from the Police if you couldn't drive faster than the speed limit?
  • SwissEvans 10 Jan 2014 16:24:47 96 posts
    Seen 2 days ago
    Registered 8 months ago
    True enough. But to me, it just seems weird to say; you have the personal liberty to damage your body in these ways (alcohol, fast food, smoking), but not these ways (illegal drugs). I'm wondering what the legal difference is between say alcohol and marijuana (or other low class drugs) that makes one legal and the other illegal, other than the arbitrary decision to say so. If there is something marijuana does or has that puts it in a different category for example then i can understand. Meh, just speculating. I'll let the topic get back to the original point ha!
  • Zomoniac 10 Jan 2014 16:26:09 7,826 posts
    Seen 6 hours ago
    Registered 10 years ago
    SwissEvans wrote:
    One thing i dont get is why the government spends so much money on helping people quit, making it harder to buy cigarettes, making them more expensive, hiding them in shops, forcing them to have plain branding. When they could just make them illegal? Just seems really disingenuous they make such a big deal about how bad it is, yet let it go on.
    They do the little cheap things to keep the lobbyists quiet. If they actively wanted everyone to stop then they'd heavily subsidise the mass-market cessation aids, which appear to cost more than actually smoking, and wouldn't be keen to see electronic cigarettes disappear from store shelves. The claims that it's the pretty shade of blue on a Mayfair packet that inspires people to take up a destructive habit and removing it will change anything are laughable.
  • Zomoniac 10 Jan 2014 16:27:11 7,826 posts
    Seen 6 hours ago
    Registered 10 years ago
    SwissEvans wrote:
    I'm wondering what the legal difference is between say alcohol and marijuana (or other low class drugs) that makes one legal and the other illegal, other than the arbitrary decision to say so.
    Culture. It's too established to remove. If alcohol and tobacco were discovered today they would never be legal.
  • SwissEvans 10 Jan 2014 16:33:47 96 posts
    Seen 2 days ago
    Registered 8 months ago
    Aye my take on it too :/ which is a little worrying really
  • OptimusPube 10 Jan 2014 17:38:43 2,954 posts
    Seen 1 hour ago
    Registered 2 years ago
    Bloody good advert that.

    You better watch out.
    You better beware.
    Albert said E=MC˛

  • Metalfish 10 Jan 2014 18:02:03 8,818 posts
    Seen 5 days ago
    Registered 9 years ago
    The only reasons speed limiters aren't the default are because it's unpopular and expensive. Do any insurance companies offer discounts for them?
  • Psychotext 10 Jan 2014 19:48:48 53,946 posts
    Seen 4 hours ago
    Registered 8 years ago
    Menace wrote:
    But if the car in front of you is going at max speed there's no reason you should be overtaking them in the first place.
    Everyone drives at the speed limit, always.

    I've lost count of the number of times I've been stuck behind someone pootling along on country A roads (basically all of Wales) at about 45mph.
  • OptimusPube 10 Jan 2014 19:52:06 2,954 posts
    Seen 1 hour ago
    Registered 2 years ago
    If all cars were limited to 70mph it would put a lot a car companies out of business.

    You better watch out.
    You better beware.
    Albert said E=MC˛

  • mal 10 Jan 2014 20:15:08 22,456 posts
    Seen 4 hours ago
    Registered 13 years ago
    OptimusPube wrote:
    If all cars were limited to 70mph it would put a lot a car companies out of business.
    Is that really true any more? Most cars these days are advertised using mpg figures and various acceleration figures (most famously, 0-60mph). I haven't known the top speed of any genuine road car I've been able to afford since the old Mini Cooper. Cars where I am aware of a top speed figure existing are generally track cars.

    Cubby didn't know how to turn off sigs!

  • OptimusPube 10 Jan 2014 20:22:02 2,954 posts
    Seen 1 hour ago
    Registered 2 years ago
    Well I don't think Ferrari, Lamborghini, Noble and the like would be too happy.

    You better watch out.
    You better beware.
    Albert said E=MC˛

  • mal 10 Jan 2014 20:43:59 22,456 posts
    Seen 4 hours ago
    Registered 13 years ago
    I don't disagree with you there, but those companies don't really constitute a significant proportion of any countries motor industry (unless you're Italian), and I'm sure those cars would be allowed to have configurations disabling any speed limitation for use off the public roads (and for use by any unscrupulous middle-aged boy racers on those public roads, should they choose).

    Cubby didn't know how to turn off sigs!

  • phAge 10 Jan 2014 20:53:32 24,348 posts
    Seen 5 hours ago
    Registered 11 years ago
    Only 10% of all fatal crashes occur at impact speeds of over 70 kph.

    Edited by phAge at 20:53:46 10-01-2014
  • skuzzbag 10 Jan 2014 21:56:49 5,638 posts
    Seen 12 hours ago
    Registered 10 years ago
    It's not the fast drivers that are the most dangerous it's the reckless ones. I nearly had an accident today caused by someone trying to undertake in a merging lane despite me being in front of them by two car lengths when the lane started to merge. They decided to put their foot down at the last minute when everyone was doing about 20 mph but it didn't work out for them as frankly they were far too late.

    They were in an old Ibiza (Seat drivers seem to be mental in NI) - I'd take a 3 litre BMW overtaking at 80 mph safely on an A road any day over the cheap second hand car couldn't give a fuck types on all other roads.
  • PazJohnMitch 10 Jan 2014 22:02:29 8,006 posts
    Seen 5 hours ago
    Registered 7 years ago
    A trip to China (probably most of Asia) will easily demonstrate that reckless driving, often without lights at night, is far, far more dangerous than travelling quickly.

    Although it also shows that even a very, very good driver is likely to have an accident if they drive fast and everyone else drives erratically and never use their mirrors.
  • skuzzbag 10 Jan 2014 22:05:51 5,638 posts
    Seen 12 hours ago
    Registered 10 years ago
    Mirrors and indicators. They are there for a sodding reason.
  • MrTomFTW Moderator 10 Jan 2014 22:12:51 37,831 posts
    Seen 6 hours ago
    Registered 11 years ago
    Another thing about the situation in the video is that he's doing that speed on a rural road with other roads crossing it. It's asking for an accident as there's bound to be cars pulling out, maybe hidden by hedges. Some roads aren't suitable for high speeds - that is one of them.

    Follow me on Twitter: @MrTom
    Voted by the community "Best mod" 2011, 2012 and 2013.

  • Stickman 10 Jan 2014 23:16:34 29,664 posts
    Seen 1 week ago
    Registered 10 years ago
    Metalfish wrote:
    The only reasons speed limiters aren't the default are because it's unpopular and expensive. Do any insurance companies offer discounts for them?
    Quite a few offer an option to have a monitoring device in your car that checks speed limits and things and alters your premium accordingly.

    THIS SPACE FOR RENT

  • Mola_Ram 10 Jan 2014 23:56:46 7,233 posts
    Seen 6 minutes ago
    Registered 2 years ago
    phAge wrote:
    Only 10% of all fatal crashes occur at impact speeds of over 70 kph.
    Well, that same article says that the risk of them happening increases greatly when going over the speed limit.
  • graysonavich 11 Jan 2014 00:16:33 7,320 posts
    Seen 8 hours ago
    Registered 4 years ago
    Calling all lefty cyclists, it's your time to shine!
  • Mola_Ram 11 Jan 2014 00:40:33 7,233 posts
    Seen 6 minutes ago
    Registered 2 years ago
    A cyclist hit my car door recently.

    The door was ok though, thank god.
  • mal 11 Jan 2014 00:46:46 22,456 posts
    Seen 4 hours ago
    Registered 13 years ago
    I am a cyclist, although I am not left handed.

    Cubby didn't know how to turn off sigs!

  • Page

    of 1

    Previous Next
Log in or register to reply