Why do we have MEP's who come out with twaddle!!!
 

I have just been reading this story on the bbc news site, about an MEP called Chris Davies.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/eur...ry/default.stm

Read and weep at his stupidity!!!

Why do we put idiots like this in a position of power, when we all go and vote next can we take all take a long hard look at the grinning idiot that we are wanting to vote for, if you still like him after looking realy hard and reading all the bull (party fiction) that they come out with then feel free to vote, but if you dont then go elsewhere.

Grrrrr It's people like this that make my blood boil, postion of power should not be used for a personal agenda, it should be used to fight to make lives better for everyone!!!

Rant over for 5 mins.

"Ban all cars capable of over 101mph" , I don't see a problem with that at all, simply electronically limit the top speed (Japan enforces this on motorcycles already with a 180kph or approx 112mph limit, not sure if they do the same with cars). How fast you can get to the 101mph should be irrelevant;):D

I actually think the priciples behind it make some sort of sense, although as is usual in Europe done in the most silly way.

What is the point on manufacturing cars that do over 100 mph ?? None. Only for the idiots who want to drive around putting their lives and everyone elses at risk.

Track days, one make race series, btcc etc oh and for those who want to go over a ton, personally i have no problem with people driving fast, its when they are driving like a nob that they annoy me. Or the dithering old farts who pull out on you when your 30 ft away.

a couple of years ago i would have thought he was silly, but now as the parent of a young child who was recently hit by a car (luckily he's ok) i would quite like a half decent world for him to grow up in.

Limiting top speed is fine, but as previously said, how fast you get there shouldn't matter as acceleration is good for safe overtaking etc.
I think the main thing they should concentrate on is reducing the emissions not top speed. I'm sure the motor companies can develope new efficient engines that still put out reasonable power.

surely anyone who drives over 100 mph is an idiot full stop (no offence Mark if you read this). At that speed no matter how careful / good a driver you are its just not possible to react if something happens beyond your control. I know this from personal experience. And think of the CO2:D

quick question for those that think high speed on the motorways is wrong how many miles a year do you have to travel on motorways,??
i finsh this post after a few repys

A good 65% of my driving is all Motorway or Dualed A roads.

What an interesting debate indeed, and quite an emotional one for most.

Lets get one thing covered right away, I enjoy driving, cars are my life line and couldn't live without one..... but....

I have no need for a car that does over 100MPH
I run on LPG, which, by Carbon rights, is a credit, as it is the fuel normally burnt off at the top of the petroleum distillation process, and it produces far less harmful emissions.

So, I can agree, none of us REALLY have a need for a car that is capable of over 100MPH.... as the legal limit is 70MPH, and yes, we ALL travel faster than that on the motorway. But do you need a 150MPH car, I know I would far prefer the acceleration rather than the top end....
Fuel consumption of cars is also a consideration too, which effects pollution.

BUT there is a downside to this... how hard would it then be to limit the speed of your car in built up areas.... what about older cars that don't have the limiter fitted? If they want it to work, then they must do it in a positive sense and offer the modification to a car (not that mine will do a ton any more) and not use a BIG stick approach for compliance.

another quick point to add, and I'm talking in the eyes of the court of law,
what is the minimum speed a police officer can book you for speeding on the motorway,??
and what do you think is a good speed to travel at on motorways

there used to be a speedometer tolerance, if I remember rightly, but I think it comes more down to targets these days, not whether you are doing 90MPH on a deserted motorway or on a congested M25....

i think your wrong personally.

utterly wrong.

and its always about the CO2.....

did you know a whole season in formula 1...the most Co2 producing car, is less Co2 than 1 transatlantic flight....

worried about the CO2???

banned planes!

there still is its your speed plus 10% speedo inaccuracy plus 2 MPH
http://www.safespeed.org.uk/speedlimits.html
see paragraph starting
Motorway speed limits

but these limits were set back in 1965, when the average car was a ford Anglia with a top speed of 85 mph on a good day, with drum brakes and a stopping distance of over 260 feet, most poorly maintained cars of todays age can half that,and things like the peugeot 106 with abs can cut this buy nearly a third again.
well said pidge its not the cars we need to worry about,limiting cars will only lead to people running older less economical cars that will do the high speeds,pointless

but that is a seperate debate, and there are now companies offering ways to off-set your carbon credit when you take a flight. You could also say, most flights are essential and some are pleasure, F1 isn't essential at all.

F1 is also trying to go the gree route with Bio fuels and other sources being looked at.

I will admit, as much as we decrease our CO2, China, Japan, Taiwan and America are increasing, at a scary rate.

co2 would be removed completely if the fuel companies allowed us to run hydro fuels or nitro based ones which are easier to make and more efficient

The 70mph limit was created when most cars would struggle to reach it! The only reason it has not risen is the source of revenue by catching us speeding.

The speed which they catch us speeding is the speed limit + 10% + 2mph. So in a 70 limit it is 79mph. I recently got caught doing 36mph in a 30, and looked deeply into the in's and out's... this info came from a police forum.

With todays cars and radial tyres (rather than cross-ply) we can safely travel at 100MPH.

In Japan the cars are restricted just the same as motorbikes, and also the cruise control cannot be set at anything over 68mph. Japanese cars in the UK are usually chipped which derestricts all these limiters and also converts KPH to MPH.

If we were to have a speed governor fitted to our cars, it should only be made switcheable from under the bonnet for the purpose of track days, rolling roads etc...

I am all for transponderised speed governing, so the car can't exceed speed limits. We can still accelerate fast, but before this I think the speed limits on 80% of roads really do need reconsidering.... Rather than GPSing our cars and fine us for ever instance of exceeding the limit.

Chris

lets just live how we want to live..................................

i like driving and will not stop doing so...its part of my pleasure.....

a hobbie!

and noone REALLY needs to fly anywhere.......

So banning cars from doing 100mph will really make a big difference around towns when kids are getting hit at anything from 40 - 70mph?? Would it make a difference if a kid was hit at 99mph or 120mph?? I personally think limiting the top speed is not the answer, if you're going to limit speed of cars it should be in the 30's and 40's - limiting them to 100mph isn't going to save lives on any sort of grand scale.Look at the Autobahn's in Germany, they have less accidents than we do on our motorways and they don't even have a speed limit. Most of their cars are limited to 155mph but as said, the difference of crashing at 100mph or 150 odd would really not be that big - it's going to be a big one whatever happens if it's anything around those kind of speeds.The problem you really have is where do you stop? The police have a job to do, hence speed camera's and traffic police - people NEED to be able to break the law, it will always happen and you cannot control everything people do. If you choose to do over 100mph in an area you feel is safe, i.e desserted motorway then i personally think it's up to you - it's your choice to take the chance.It's the local reeeeeeeeeetards that wrag about through the town in their chavved up 1.2's that are the problem, their cars won't even do 100mph but they're far more dangerous to anyone else on the road driving like tw@'s around congested / built up areas.

c02 - thats like that stuff that was already in the air before being turned into fuels isn't it. Slowly moving to different fuels is great, but hype over 'CO2' is incredibly over blown - a way to tax us more some cynical people would suggest.

Tax people who exercise I say - they breath out more CO2 than lazy people. :D

I don't fancy a 3 week stint on a container ship to Australia - Think I'll fly if it's all the same to you Lee ;););)

plus i bet the ship would produce more co2 as the passenger liner we were on not to long ago this year burned or used 500 gallons a hour of heavy diesel oil OMG

Next they'll try telling us not to binge drink!

I swear politicians wear t-shirts under there shirts saying "Im the daddy".

Chris

Good to see your helping towards global warming, its still cold up here in durham, i think you need another cruise:D

To be honest the fuels nowadays are very clean to what they used to be, i have recently been doing some work for shell and they say that the emitted CO2 from our cars is peanuts and nothing like the figures quoted.
It is just another hidden tax, plus there is still another 40-50 years of oil in the north sea which is as much as BP and shell thought there was back in the sixties.
There is also a hell of a lot of oil out in canada, Kazakhstan, azerbaijan and the russian federation. let alone china etc etc, so it is very unlikely that we will be seeing any new fuels developed by the big oil companies in the near future as they are investing heavily out in Kaz and russia right now.

By the way if any engineers on here fancy some work in kazakhstan let me know, its tax free too.;)

The reason they are heavier is because of all the extra safety stuff they have now! Thing is, how many car's can't go over 100 these days; ignoring supermini's with lawnmower engines in?
My almighty (1.6 :D ) Astra does it no problem, and it not exactly a fast car in a straight line.

Politicians live in their own little world, how can you enforce the same speed limit on the same road for a big lorry and a performance car with big brakes and fat tires :eh?:

The likes of China & India are only increasing their Co2 because countries like ourselves no longer manufacture anything, we now seem happier to just buy everything in. If everyone stopped trading with them I guess their Co2 would start to fall also.

Fact was given on the news a while ago that if everybody in the UK stopped driving, Chinas increase in CO2 would make up the deficit in 30 days

I heard some crazy stat that due to importing with huge boats etc, if you drink so much as 3 Bottles of Evian water, you're actually contributing to as much pollution as the average family car will create in 1 year!

Only certain parts of the Autobahn are unlimited, most are restricted.

Carbon emissions do have a negative effect, but rather than try to push more and more out of a fossil fuel, lets go down different fuel routes.

As for cars, able to safely do over 100MPH, I totally agree, whether the majority of drivers can cope with those speeds is another thing. Personaly, I would rather see cars GPS restricted so that in built up areas, they are electronically limited to 20/30/40/50 etc....

Also, I would like to see a power limit for new users, just like you do in motorbikes, mainly to stop the tossers (male and female) ripping round estates in their dodgy Corsa's etc, not tax, insurance or MOT, let them have small cars, limited power and cheap insurance so they have no excuse over it.

Carbon emissions are a load of tosh if you ask me. 50 years ago it was an ice age coming.:D

Well said, but also link to the speed limiter should be a stereo volume limiter ;)

That's another over-hyped load of BS that's been started as it could be a nice little earner for the goverment! :mad:
The global aviation industry as a whole only puts out 2-3% of CO2 emissions yet it's being given a bad rep as there's money to be made from extra taxes using the 'Green' label as justication for it! :mad: :mad: :mad:

Don't believe everything these politicians say as they are really struggling to justify their BS figures as anything near reality...

it is all subjective though, a plane only only half full is innefficient in the amount of pollution to passengers whereas a full plane, especially the likes aof a 747, the carbon off-set per passenger is far less.

I agree though, governments use a 'Green Tax' as another way of raising money from you.... and I think people would swallow it better if the money earnt off tax was ring fenced to making energy plants from renewable sources. Although you try to get planning permission for a windfarm.... jeeez

i personnaly travel at 90mph tops on motorways,what gets me is people who say speeding kills,end of story.when in fact its the drivers who dont aply speed to the conditions they are in.one example which realy scares me is when i travel in fog,the amount of drivers who still bomb along.it just beggers belief what goes through their minds.theres got to be more traffic police on the road for me.

[quote=pidge;43465]i think your wrong personally.

utterly wrong.



*edited*

This government Policies this country to the lowest common denominator.... so as far as they are concerned, we are all paedophilles, so the 99.99999% of parents can't film their childs Christmas Panto, take pictures etc, so why not drivers too.... If you are subjective then crime rates go down, I do the school run every day, and when I drive past the local comp, kids are coming OUT of it after 9am.... but truancy is down... This government has mucked things up a bit.

Anyhows, we digress about the thread and should try to keep on the Carbon Creidits track.. Did you know, the government gives grants to replace old central heating boilers, so I phoned them up, but there is a catch... your boiler got to either be broke or condemmed, but it takes about 6-8 weeks to process the paperwork..... and they want us being fuel efficient??

limiting cars to 100 doesn't really achieve much, very few accidents happen at over 100, and in the few cases they do, chances are it's fatal, wouldn't make me feel much better knowing that i'm being limited to something above the fatal speed, what does that achieve, a bit less mess for the highway maintenance guys to clear up?

The problem with GPS limiting cars to lower speeds, is if you pull out of a junction without looking properly first or any other similar situation, like someone pulls out to overtake at the same time as you on a 3 lane road when they shouldn't and you need to put your foot down to avoid an accident, the gps limiter/100mph limiter kicks in and causes rather than stops an accident. Rare occurances maybe, a gps limiter would save more lives than it killed probably. But why do we have to constantly encounter limits and restrictions on us, does it stop before we're told what to eat each day, when and how, and then when to sleep?

I think some of the reasons is because, most of us do things in moderation, like speeding, but only on open roads where it is safe, or drinking moderately, but there is getting more and more people who think that road safety is someone elses problem, same as drinking in excess... but they still expect them to be picked up and stitched up when they split the forehead open falling over whilst pissed.

There was mention that those, who are pissed and have accidents, may well be charged a small fee for treatment, whilst this goes against the grain of why we have the NHS.... but things have changed since it was setup, and if you can't control your drinking, get so pissed you hurt yourself, should you be treated for free?

[quote=Medders;43573]ooooooooo

i wanna kno what was said..........

[quote=pidge;43620]No, you don't!!!:D :D :D