So it seems someone has started a petition to no longer require the need to display a front number plate like many other countries.

 

Here's the link if anyone wants to have a look and maybe sign it

 

https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/132590

Signed :yes:

Yes please, however the points made in the description are very weak imo. Outdated and unnecessary maybe, but just because it doesn't look attractive is not a convincing reason to remove it.

This is my opinion...

Signed it ( should have one for the car tax and get rid off that bugger)

Signed it ( should have one for the car tax and get rid off that bugger)

 

Eh we don't need to display car tax anymore [emoji53]

I've signed it but I doubt they will achieve anything g the government likes front plates for traffic tickets.

Done and sent to a few others.

Signed. As a petition with over 100000 signatures didnt bring back Clarkson, I cant see this working... Nice idea though

All the motorway camera's use the front plates don't they so this will never happen :innocent: not even sure I'd want it to, just makes it harder to identify a vehicle in a hit and run etc.

 

Now I think of it, don't lots of police cars have cameras on the front that check number plates for tax etc? There's no way they'll nullify that investment! And bus lanes, yellow boxes...

Motorbikes don't have front plates

You got more chance of a sexual liaison with the Queen than this becoming reality

Dream on. Neither will they relent on funny fonts, background images or anything else that hinders automated plate recognition. Until every car has a long range readable RFID tag or similar ....

It will NEVER happen. 'Many other countries'? LOL Less than 20 states in the US are front number-plate-free, so not even a full country. I am unaware of any other countries where you don't require a front number place.

 

Whilst I think cars look better without a front number plate, this is a silly petition that will get absolutely nowhere, there is no gain or incentive for that law to be changed when a high number of NR systems are set up to read front plates. The cost to change fixed systems or re-write documentation for law and user applications will make this 100% prohibitive.

 

How would a police car equipped with an ANPR system then be able to read a plate on a car coming towards it? It wouldn't.

Edited June 22, 20169 yr by Funkysi

Would also have been nicer if the petition starter had actually used the correct acronym too. :)

Petition should be against Alfa romeo to make, just for once a car that the number plate doesn't look like a complete eyesore! :lol:... as for the getting rid of the front number plate, it will never happen and I would rather see am 80 mph limit raised as a more productive petition.

I dont see the speed limit being raised anytime soon, this subject came up on a speed awareness course i attended in February and i found myself agreeing with the current limit in principal.

 

70mph gives you 10% +2 allowing 79mph, most people do over this speed on the motorway and you are likely to get away with 85mph under certain road conditions and Police discretion, you raise that limit to 80mph then you are given 90mph allowance which will inevitably be broken up to the ton mark.

I dont see the speed limit being raised anytime soon, this subject came up on a speed awareness course i attended in February and i found myself agreeing with the current limit in principal.

 

70mph gives you 10% +2 allowing 79mph, most people do over this speed on the motorway and you are likely to get away with 85mph under certain road conditions and Police discretion, you raise that limit to 80mph then you are given 90mph allowance which will inevitably be broken up to the ton mark.

Exactly. As much as I'd like to cruise around at those speeds, I sure as hell don't trust all the morons you see on motorways to drive around me like that!

I dont see the speed limit being raised anytime soon, this subject came up on a speed awareness course i attended in February and i found myself agreeing with the current limit in principal.

 

70mph gives you 10% +2 allowing 79mph, most people do over this speed on the motorway and you are likely to get away with 85mph under certain road conditions and Police discretion, you raise that limit to 80mph then you are given 90mph allowance which will inevitably be broken up to the ton mark.

 

And? I know you have to set a limit but currently 100mph is a license loosing speed. With modern cars and motorways there's no reason why 100mph shouldn't be perfectly safe yet it's criminal. Personally if its dry I think they should leave you alone till about 90 and 100mph should be a fine. Too heavy handed are out motor way limits.

 

Intact, sod it. I'd like to see the offence of excessive speed scrapped. With more focus on driving to the conditions. That dick that does 70 in the snow because "Range Rover" (probably on summer tyres) could then be addressed whilst retaining the ability to book bellends doing 60 past a school. Maybe retain 30mph limits for built up areas, villages etc.

Edited June 22, 20169 yr by Stephen

Hmm I have a sneaking suspicion Mr RoadTrafficAccidentStatistics may have something to say about your claim 100mph crashes are perfectly safe.

 

Besides that's not the only issue. It's also people's reaction times, which of course have nothing to do with the car. And awareness of what's around them, and speed differentials as not everyone will go that fast

Hmm I have a sneaking suspicion Mr RoadTrafficAccidentStatistics may have something to say about your claim 100mph crashes are perfectly safe.

 

Besides that's not the only issue. It's also people's reaction times, which of course have nothing to do with the car. And awareness of what's around them, and speed differentials as not everyone will go that fast

 

I think personally there's a lot of stats out there that "prove" that speed was the cause of the accident. This may have more to do with justification of current laws. The biggest cause of accidents is lack of concentration. Speed is merely a factor that worsens the out come, it's rarely if ever the root cause. If you try and go round a tight hair pin in the wet at 40 on a national speed limit road, the result is forgone, the cause of the crash was your inability to drive to the road condition in front of you. You can drive under the limit and still be driving dangerously, road conditions and layout can help to reduce the safe speed considerably. If you can't drive in a straight at 90mph on a dry Tarmac road arguably should you have a liecense?

Also I didn't say accidents at 100mph were safe. Accidents at 30mph can be disastrous in some circumstances.

I dont see the speed limit being raised anytime soon, this subject came up on a speed awareness course i attended in February and i found myself agreeing with the current limit in principal.

 

70mph gives you 10% +2 allowing 79mph, most people do over this speed on the motorway and you are likely to get away with 85mph under certain road conditions and Police discretion, you raise that limit to 80mph then you are given 90mph allowance which will inevitably be broken up to the ton mark.

 

Not entirely the case as the new Digital speed cameras going up on the east of the M25 and M20 (no doubt elswhere) have a zero tolerance for going over 70mph or the regulated controlled limit that may be in place.

 

Many drivers already cruise around at speeds of 80+mph which is acceptable in the right conditions, but of course they are the ones most likely to cause an accident when they spot Plod parked up or cruising ahead, usually blind panic sets in, followed by a deft slam of the breaks and a perfectly executed cutting in of the traffic causing the unique sight of a concertina mayhem...all in the avoidance of being caught at said speed.

 

Not an excuse of course, but I am sure more motorists would travel at 80 but not necessarily above as i think most people except this as a comfortable cruising speed that works for the modern car, makes tangible progress on a journey and is not to fast that you can still react to and from other motorists and situations around you.

 

Speed awareness courses are government funded therefore have an agenda, they also still believe the motorist is responsible for everyone and everything not on four wheels, irrespective of the behaviour of other road users, powered or otherwise.

Agreed steve. My driver awareness corse was the biggest misuse of statistics (a traffic officer agreed with me on that one). The highlight was when he exclaimed that the most dangerous roads in Dorset are 30mph limits, his reasoning, there's where most accidents happen. The safest roads where, motorways. I asked him where most people were seriously injured or killed, national speed limit A roads. "So to me that would suggest that 30mph zones skew the stats due to fender benders and minor accidents, surely where most people die is the most dangerous." I said. He didn't like that much. I then almost fell off my chair as the bloke a few to my side announced, "of corse Dorsets motorway are the safest roads, we ain't got one mate." :lol: oh pure comedy.

I think personally there's a lot of stats out there that "prove" that speed was the cause of the accident. This may have more to do with justification of current laws. The biggest cause of accidents is lack of concentration. Speed is merely a factor that worsens the out come, it's rarely if ever the root cause. If you try and go round a tight hair pin in the wet at 40 on a national speed limit road, the result is forgone, the cause of the crash was your inability to drive to the road condition in front of you. You can drive under the limit and still be driving dangerously, road conditions and layout can help to reduce the safe speed considerably. If you can't drive in a straight at 90mph on a dry Tarmac road arguably should you have a liecense?

Also I didn't say accidents at 100mph were safe. Accidents at 30mph can be disastrous in some circumstances.

 

All of what you said is of course true.

 

Speed is merely a factor that worsens the out come

 

But this is the whole point!

It is, which is why I don't say "speeding should be legal" merely that the current logics and prosecution there after are unbalanced to the "offence".

Not an excuse of course, but I am sure more motorists would travel at 80 but not necessarily above as i think most people except this as a comfortable cruising speed that works for the modern car, makes tangible progress on a journey and is not to fast that you can still react to and from other motorists and situations around you.

 

I agree, I imagine the worry is that if 80 is the norm for a 70 limit, it wouldn't be too long for 90 to be the norm for an 80 limit. I would think we would all agree most people don't bat much of an eyelid going 10mph above any speed, whether you think it's a good idea or not. I personally don't have any problem with the current status quo of you can get away with 80.

The most credible reason to retain said current limit is actually pollution. I'm a self confessed climate change skeptic. Going faster equals more pollution, both in terms of noise and emissions regardless on there short or long term effects.