xr-stu

for a start, why start giving it the barry big balls behind your keyboard calling me names? grow the fuck up.

secondly, go back and read what i said. i said in my opinion, anyone who doesnt wear a seatbelt is an idiot. but seeing as youve only ever not worn yours once, (the night you unfortunatly happened to have an accident) that doesnt make you an idiot does it?

read what i say before getting busy with your fingers, and wind your fucking neck in.


and i dont drive like a cock, i drive fast where i think its safe to. whats unsafe or dangerous about doing 100mph on an empty straight road? youre obviously one of the 29mph in a 30 brigade who think theyre the safest driver on the road. granted, sticking to the speed limit isnt a bad thing, but driving safely above the limit isnt either.

xr-stu

exactly

Harris.

whats not safe about driving at 100 mph???



Its a public fucking road you cock , straight road or not !!!!

And if im one of these 29mph drivers then im a dam sight safer than you on the road doing 100mph because the road is straight or IT FEELS SAFE . you are a class one bellend !!

xr-stu

tell me what makes it unsafe. regardless of the fact its a public road or not.

xr-stu

ok, this is a for instance im talking about.

if driver A drives round at 29mph in a 30, but pays little attention to whats going on up ahead, is too busy talking to their passenger and generally isnt concentrating on the road. and driver B sits at 40 mph along the same bit of road, but is paying attention to the cars infront, and is concentrating, not chatting to his passenger, does that still mean driver A is safer?


and do me a favour, stop calling me a cock and bellend, im being civil and polite to you, id appreciate the same back. you wouldnt do it to my face, so dont do it over here. thanks.

Harris.

Ok so your flying along on YOUR STRAIGHT EMPTY ROAD at 100mph and you think thats safe, you are never the only one on the road.

To me thats makes you a total twat on the rd as anyone could be about,and if you did cause a crash (you would be ok because you had the belt on right ??) and hurt someone you would say , but mr policeman i was being safe ???????????


And if that 100mph is SAFE then you tell me why the limit is 70mph???

Harris.

I wouldnt have any problem calling you a bellend or twat to your face !!

Driver B , simple there breaking the speed limit /law

xr-stu

of course you would big man.

you really are in a totally new class of retardedness.

i cant be wasting anymore of my life argueing with you.

Harris.

And so are you, lets put it this way . If some total selfish prick drove into any of my family/loved ones doing 100mph and killed them im sure id have something to say about it stu, but then of course so would you ,you was just being safe

Big man

Chip

iTrader: (3)

Because it was introduced decades ago and has never been reviewed since because it generates so much tax revenue being where it is I would imagine, its also good for the environment, I dont believe there is any safety reason for it being that though, and as far as im aware germany with no such limit has a lower death toll on its roads than we do.

Modern car, with abs and airbags down an empty motorway in clear visibility at 100mph+ is far less likely to hurt someone than driving around not paying attention at 29mph in a 30mph limit.

Speed is a factor in accidents, but its not the B-all and end-all like the government seem to manage to brainwash all the idiots into thinking (including you it would seem)

Harris.

So the people who stick to the speed limits are all brainwashed idiots? get real

Chip

iTrader: (3)

If they think that automatically makes them safer than someone else exceeding the limit in a different set of circumstances, then yes of course it does.

If you think 70mph up a busy wet motorway driving an old car is safer than 100mph on an empty dry motorway in a modern car for example then of course you are an idiot.

Safety is about driving to the conditions and using appropriate speed, not just blindly doing an arbitrary speed and assuming that makes you safe.

Rich_w

Yes, because they assume that their speed being legal means they wont have an accident. Therfore the dont pay as much attention. Whereas as XR-Stu rightly points out, its the other factors that determine if you crash.

100mph on a dead flat motorway is far safer than 29mph whilst eating a sandwich whilst driving in a town. And which one is actually illegal?

Edit: Too slow

Chip

iTrader: (3)

The KEY factor in avoiding an accident on a motorway, is appropriate breaking distances for the speed you are doing, thats FAR more important than the actual speed you are doing itself.

Harris.

Ive not said driving while on the phone or eating is safe

Rich_w

No, but you blindly assumed that 29mph was safer than 100 and it isn't. As Chip (and others) have pointed out Speed doesn't do you in on its own. Its inappropriate speed. But too many people listen to the Governments "Speed Kills" and believe it.

Irony is that less than 3% of all accident's are ACTUALLY solely down to excesive speed. And thats the governments own figures.

Benni

Perfect example Chip; I completely agree.

Harris.

Read again, 29mph was safer than 40 mph

When i say this i mean around town

xr-stu

i agree round town, infact around town im normally well under 30 due to the ammount of gormless pedestrians there are around.

im on about other roads that might be a 30 limit, or 40, or 50. the whole point of this conversation is that speeding in certain circumstances, while paying attention, would be safer than sticking to the speed limit but not paying attention.

i cannot see how you can not agree with that?!

tracktoy

RE: the crash

fook me dai- sounds like you were quite lucky to get away with just the arm

dojj

iTrader: (3)

i've not met you, but i think you'd need to bring your soapbox along

Harris.

Really ?

Stu pointed out he dont see a problem with doing 100mph on a straight rd,he didnt mention a MOTORWAY to start with ,he mentioned 30 40 50 mph roads

Glenn_

iTrader: (1)

My god what a mess you have all been lucky.

ikarma70

firstly the poster of this thread is a lucky boy what there wasn't more injuries and for not wearing a seatbelt i think there should be no injury claim from the thread poster(just my opinion).

secondly...speeding does kill when combined with other factors but driving at any speed when some numpty steps out in front of you when you are yards away will still result in some injury but i agree that speed limits should be adhered to.

thirdly ...is there any need for name calling,afterall we are all adults here

Roosie

iTrader: (8)

How am i a vulture its my job its what i do for a living! its not different from people who has posted on here saying they damaged a part of there car and someone commenting " i have one if interested" but im not selling im giving a service thats free. A lot of people out there dont even know they can claim for injuries that they have had before its too late like someone i spoke to earlier and it was just too late! The reasons why labour bought this into play is so people can have a "freedom of speech" it wouldnt be fair in not having a choice who represents you with you personal injury claim, for example i feel sorry for anyone that uses Quinn Direct insurance to handle a personal injury claim because there payouts are terrbile and there crap and i havent seen a good one yet.

Harris.

Thankyou .speed limits should be adhered to.


But if you want to jump on my case for what i think is right and wrong, then KEYBOARD WARRIOR stu and his little friends have taken it to the muppett room

fordrallycar

iTrader: (4)

Lucky people

Harris.

Dont worry yourself about it mate, the PF anti claim squad might need your help one day

dai burnsy

bit of both really little too fast and black ice shortly followed by a lampost

dai burnsy

was nt i just.people are having good rant are'nt they. i know it was very stupid not wearing a belt but i dont think i should nt claim for loss of earnings etc .i not the type of person to claim for a stubbed toe lol.i am genuinely injured and i first to admit i should get less cos of not wearing belt but be nice to have my wages covered for the time off work thats all or am i being un fair guys?

Harris.

I claimed and my gf claimed too ,both of us had our belts off. If you are not at fault then claim mate

The only thing that might cause a problem tho, if its the persons fault driving the car you was in you will be claiming against them !! Friend or family ???

dojj

iTrader: (3)

. there's the point


you missed it

Harris.

Always one that has to carry it on

Keyboard WARRIOR and his little friends have taken it to a different now mate ,go join them in there

AlexF

Everyones got a story how seatbelts arnt helpful - yet its fucking obvious that in the vast vast majority of accidents they save THOUSANDS of lives.

The ignorance of some people astounds me!

mcst

Got off lightly really in that crash, i agree with others though nobody travels in my car without a seatbelt.

Re: speeding
I would say that its "inappropriate" speed thats the factor not simply speeding. I'm sure we all understand that 35 in a 30 would have very different consequences than if you were driving at 30 particularly if you hit a pedestrian.
However,
I'm not pro speeding (lets face it we all do it) but i think theres room for the motorway limit to be 80 and some nsl roads reduced to 50. People forget that the braking distances were set using an Anglia on crossply's and drum brakes! Braking, suspension and tyre technology has moved on massively.
Speeding arguments really get me going! People round here have signs in their cars "30 in ..............please" i followed one at 29.99mph then he managed 40 in a short nsl, i slowed for the next village 30 and he carried on at 40 ish! I have real issues with all the road captains, i drive fast because i enjoy it but its not everywhere and i always adjust my speed according to the conditions, but a lot of people drive fast because the car allows them to and lack the simplest ability to read road conditions etc......

Just my 2p.

Roosie

iTrader: (8)

Dont matter dave premiums only go up with how many accidents the blokes had ie the insurance company will know hes had a accident no doubt thats it!! dont matter if someone claims Ł1 or Ł1 million his policy wont change it will just change because of the accident.

JTECH James

iTrader: (13)

my opinion is this....

its real simple...

if you break the law by speeding, not wearing your seatbelt or in any other way while in a car and you have an accident......tough shit.

imo you shouldnt be able to claim fook all because YOU took the risk, YOU got hurt.... its YOUR FAULT- so nobody else should pay you for it.


we all do things illegal on the road, but if you get caught out...you cant complain, just accept you were wrong and move on


claim for loss of earnings? try wearing a seatbelt and following the law....then you may not have had to...!


let me guess, on the claim form you would "forget" to mention the fact YOU were breaking the law?

DanW@FastFord

iTrader: (1)

I think you'll find that driver innattention/error causes the vast majority of accidents. Actual 'speeding', i.e going over the actual speed limit only accounts for around 3% of all injury accidents.

And yes I do speed from time-to-time, while wearing my seatbelt.

Roosie

iTrader: (8)

Nope because it will be on police record

dai burnsy

i already told police etc i was nt wearing belt if i cant get a penny cos of that so be it i not going to lie .i wonder if you would have same opinion if you made a mistake .to be honest i just happy to still be here .