Jump to content

Mountain Watch


Recommended Posts

In past motoring history matters;

People argued against compulsory seat belt fitting and wearing.

People argued against drink driving limits and subsequent reductions

People argued against compulsory crash helmets for motorcyclists

People argued against compulsory emissions equipment and regulations on vehicles

People argued against minimum tyre tread depth and tyre condition regulations

People probably argued against the imposition of 20, 30, 40, 50 and 70mph speed limits in the UK too.

People argued about the imposition of most things to do with motoring

But now with the benefit of hindsight, most of us see, or have seen the benefits. Often because we're still alive to do so, courtesy of those impositions.

  • Like 4
  • Thanks 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 1.2k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Expect better from you on this. You like driving fast and think you should be allowed to go for it ‘if it’s safe for you’. So do I actually, but in an attempt to follow Spock’s principle that the need

During lockdown I didn’t mind the trip over the mountain at 40mph with no overtaking. It was quite relaxing and took perhaps 5 minutes longer than usual.    Now, if I come upon a lorry doing 40

As someone who has dealt with hundreds of traffic accidents on the island, many of them of a serious nature and a good few fatal I can assure you that the first thing is always to protect the scene. T

Posted Images

It's not so much about the law but whether it's enforced or not. The drink-drive law was rigorously enforced and so was effective. Very few people take the risk now. Same with speed limits. Put a 60mph limit on the mountain, get some coppers up there, and hammer the first three boy racers and lunatics who abuse it. Five year ban, big fine, and prison for the worst abusers. It would be sorted within the first month.

  • Like 5
Link to post
Share on other sites
42 minutes ago, Non-Believer said:

In past motoring history matters;

People argued against compulsory seat belt fitting and wearing.

People argued against drink driving limits and subsequent reductions

People argued against compulsory crash helmets for motorcyclists

People argued against compulsory emissions equipment and regulations on vehicles

People argued against minimum tyre tread depth and tyre condition regulations

People probably argued against the imposition of 20, 30, 40, 50 and 70mph speed limits in the UK too.

People argued about the imposition of most things to do with motoring

But now with the benefit of hindsight, most of us see, or have seen the benefits. Often because we're still alive to do so, courtesy of those impositions.

I didn't argue against any of those. But I will certainly argue against excessive data logging and an in - car system that prevents breaking the speed limit. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

The posting of a speed limit is effectively as the result of a risk assessment. The data and engineering, having been professionally analysed, comes up with a figure which is suitable for the majority of people to traverse it in safety. 

In the absence of that overarching risk assessment we are effectively saying ‘make your own mind up’ with limited consequences. When it is in place it has to be a much more conscious and culpable decision.

As for data logging and speeding prevention through tech, you won’t have a choice. This will be brought in via the EU, which standards the UK will follow whether we are in or out.

Edited by Derek Flint
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, HeliX said:

I didn't argue against any of those. But I will certainly argue against excessive data logging and an in - car system that prevents breaking the speed limit. 

In no time at all it will seem completely normal. It will be easy to normalise it - at first via a combination of lower premiums and the voiding of warranties on new cars if people tamper with it. And failing that, the tin-foil-hat argument.

(Nothing to do with motoring - but you're going to hate CBDCs which are shaping up to be one of the big privacy issues over the next 5 years and accelerated by Covid as Central Banks move towards abolishing cash :) )

  • Like 2
  • Haha 1
  • Confused 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Derek Flint said:

As for data logging and speeding prevention through tech, you won’t have a choice. This will be brought in via the EU, which standards the UK will follow whether we are in or out.

There's always a choice. Even if it involves not buying a car made after 2022.

More involved lessons and harder tests are still the answer in my view. It would also reduce ALL causes of accident. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, pongo said:

In no time at all it will seem completely normal. It will be easy to normalise it - at first via a combination of lower premiums and the voiding of warranties on new cars if people tamper with it. And failing that, the tin-foil-hat argument.

(Nothing to do with motoring - but you're going to hate CBDCs which are shaping up to be one of the big privacy issues over the next 5 years and accelerated by Covid as Central Banks move towards abolishing cash :) )

The New World Order run by the Illuminati?

Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, Shake me up Judy said:

It's not so much about the law but whether it's enforced or not

I do not think that this is ultimately a problem with the Mountain Road racers - although they are clearly the end result. In every country you will also find people who wish to act out their fantasies on the roads.

Instead of the forum followers commenting on the antics of the racers, perhaps they might consider the inaction of the lawmakers. Instead of complaining about the numbers of accidents, they might wonder why the IoM gov. is the only one in the known universe that does not have a speed limit on two-way roads.

In one of the comments above, someone queried if the need-for-speed was compensating for sexual inadequacies. It doesn't take much effort to find links on the Internet that support that. But what is the underlying reason for the MHKs to bury their head in the sand and ignore what the rest of the world does. Do they also get a thrill out of "being different" - irrespective of the injuries and fatalities?

 

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, Two-lane said:

I do not think that this is ultimately a problem with the Mountain Road racers - although they are clearly the end result. In every country you will also find people who wish to act out their fantasies on the roads.

Instead of the forum followers commenting on the antics of the racers, perhaps they might consider the inaction of the lawmakers. Instead of complaining about the numbers of accidents, they might wonder why the IoM gov. is the only one in the known universe that does not have a speed limit on two-way roads.

In one of the comments above, someone queried if the need-for-speed was compensating for sexual inadequacies. It doesn't take much effort to find links on the Internet that support that. But what is the underlying reason for the MHKs to bury their head in the sand and ignore what the rest of the world does. Do they also get a thrill out of "being different" - irrespective of the injuries and fatalities?

 

It's human nature to want to go faster.

When you're a young lad particularly It's an easy trap to fall into. We've probably mostly all done it.

Comparing it to sexual inadequacy seems slightly creepy as far as i can see.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, HeliX said:

More involved lessons and harder tests are still the answer in my view. It would also reduce ALL causes of accident. 

In general this is the kind of argument which appeals to Institute of Advanced Motoring (Alan Partridge) types. Like a sort-of British motoring version of the NRA. And with similar sounding arguments in many cases.

The fact that most normals do not have accidents is evidence that the existing test is perfectly adequate. Normal motorists do not need to be trained to believe that they can safely drive at unnecessarily excessive speeds. Driving should only be about getting from A-B. Except in a sports environment - ie on private race tracks. It should not need to be a case of raising everybody to the level of gettaway driver. Rather it should be about using legislation and technology to improve convenience and safety.

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, pongo said:

In no time at all it will seem completely normal. It will be easy to normalise it - at first via a combination of lower premiums and the voiding of warranties on new cars if people tamper with it. And failing that, the tin-foil-hat argument.

(Nothing to do with motoring - but you're going to hate CBDCs which are shaping up to be one of the big privacy issues over the next 5 years and accelerated by Covid as Central Banks move towards abolishing cash :) )

I don't mind paying a higher premium and owning an older car :)

As for digital currencies, they're also the answer to privacy concerns!

Edited by HeliX
Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, thesultanofsheight said:

Indeed some of us will be like Mad Max back the last of the V8s. No ECUs, no chips, no trackers! 

I'm part of the way there. I have the right engine. Has the rest of the guff though.

I'd love to have time and space to rebuild something like an old Fastback.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, pongo said:

In general this is the kind of argument which appeals to Institute of Advanced Motoring (Alan Partridge) types. Like a sort-of British motoring version of the NRA. And with similar sounding arguments in many cases.

The fact that most normals do not have accidents is evidence that the existing test is perfectly adequate. Normal motorists do not need to be trained to believe that they can safely drive at unnecessarily excessive speeds. Driving should only be about getting from A-B. Except in a sports environment - ie on private race tracks. It should not need to be a case of raising everybody to the level of gettaway driver. Rather it should be about using legislation and technology to improve convenience and safety.

"Most" people in any group you want to define don't have accidents, clearly. Most people who drive quicker than average don't have accidents. And the majority of accidents happen within the speed limit.

The standard of driving is shocking. I'm not suggesting everyone should be a getaway driver, and I think you know that. It is easier to argue against a strawman, of course.

There are plenty of places that road conditions, weather conditions or vehicle conditions make doing the speed limit unsafe. Driving lessons teach you to pass your test, and nothing else. The driving test checks that you can operate the controls and follow road signs, and not much else. There ought to be training about vehicle maintenance, assessment of road conditions and how they affect vehicle behaviour, and a compulsory number of hours driver training.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, HeliX said:

As for digital currencies, they're also the answer to privacy concerns!

haha no. Really not.

And certainly not the CBDCs which are quickly going to coming on stream. They will have tracking build straight into the protocols. Why wouldn't they?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.


×
×
  • Create New...