On Thursday, 25 December 2014 10:04:10 UTC, Tim Lamb wrote:
In message , bert ]
writes
Nope. It's wrong to pick on someone speeding who will probably never
cause an accident. The ones that drive badly tend to drive slower
BECAUSE they're **** drivers.

"Probably" but not "certainly"
The vast majority of drivers - if not all - will think they will never
probably cause an accident.

There is a noticeable *tailing off* in driver confidence, opportunism
and determination to get where they are going, outside *rush hours*.

I suppose this is inevitable as us geriatrics, probably driving less
than 3000 miles per year, venture out when the road is less busy.

At the risk of fortune, I can say that there have never been any points
on my licence. However, I am aware of slow responses to fresh driving
situations and difficulty in complying with unexpected traffic signals.
Lights at roundabouts in Aylesbury come to mind!

Distraction from conversation, radio, mobile phones, sat nav. can't
help.

--
Tim Lamb

I refuse to believe those tests that repute to show that using a mobile phone while driving is more dangerous than drunk driving.

Either (a) Drunk driving isn't as dangerous as we've been told for years or (b)the tests are spurious. An awful lot of people behind the wheel are using a mobile phone. If we had the same number of them as drunk drivers there would presumably be carnage.

On a simple level using a mobile phone is transitory whereas if I get behind the wheel drunk I'm going to be drunk all through the journey.

I'm not denying that using a mobile is dangerous while driving but these nonsense arguments that are being presented, imho, do more harm than good.