Speeding Yet Again - They're Having A Laugh!

[MobileB 10]

For all those people who condemn speeding motorists (and I have never once condoned speeding in build up areas in my several posts about this subject) and now put forward my father as the latest criminal.

 

He is 71 years old (72 next month), has been driving with a perfectly clean license of well over 50 years. He has spent the last four days in hopsital for a great New Year. On opening up his post, he has received a speeding notice. Apparently at 6.30 am on December 27th, he got caught doing 34 mph in 30 mph zone.

 

So out of his pension, he must pay a £60 fine and has now been branded a criminal with 3 points on his licence.

 

I will not condone speeding, but how on earth can anyone support justice in that situation? Please someone tell me!

[SnailyBoy 10]

I'm not sure if a fixed penalty speeding fine is classed as a criminal offence.

 

But overall the law is the same for everyone regardless of age or previous driving record, and that's how it should be.

[D2J 10]

Originally posted by MobileB

I will not condone speeding

 

You won't condone speeding but your narked your dad has been done for 34mph in 30 zone ?

 

Ok its not excessive speed but in reality its still speeding above the set limit.. If it had been anyone else they would have got the same ticket and fine no doubt.. regardless of age

[spiffymonkey 10]

Originally posted by MobileB I will not condone speeding, but

how on earth can anyone support justice in that situation? Please someone tell

me!

 

I'm afraid I'm going to have to blunt; I'm sorry your father has not been well

but I can't see how a sob story is related to a speeding offence? AFAIK personal circumstance is irrelevant to how fast you drive, and I'm not even sure that a speeding fine is classed as a 'criminal offence' in so far as you don't get a criminal record for it; just points that last 5 years.

 

It's a well known fact that a car hitting someone at 35mph is twice as likely

to kill someone than a car hitting someone at 30mph. We'll be generous and say

that at 34 mph you are only(!) 1.8 times as likely to kill someone. They'll still be 100% dead, whichever way you look at it.

 

I'm not saying I'm a perfect driver. I've never been caught speeding but I have

noticed by speedo creeping up to the 35 mark (and occassionally even higher if,

for instance, I'm concentrating on something else like a bus trying to pull in

front of me while I'm along side it...).

 

Sadly, speed cameras, however irritating and no matter how much I think they

are used as a cash cow, do make people more aware of their speed and they do

make people slow down. Hell, they're preferable to the millions of speed humps

all over the place destroying suspension and exhausts!

[cruella 10]

Originally posted by SnailyBoy

I'm not sure if a fixed penalty speeding fine is classed as a criminal offence.

 

But overall the law is the same for everyone regardless of age or previous driving record, and that's how it should be.

 

A Fixed Penalty Notice is informing you that you have commited an offence. The notice offers you the opportunity to mittigate the offence by payment, then all charges are dropped. If payment is not recieved the matter goes to Madgistrates court and you will be braught to justice for the offence committed. Anyone can appeal a Fixed Penalty Notice.

[vision 10]

I totally agree with you MobileB. 99% of drivers go over the speed limit occasionally - this does not make them bad drivers.

Unfortunately chances are that good drivers will still get booked and some bad drivers will get away with it.

 

Once people know where the cameras are , they slow down then speed up after it, this is particularly evident on the ring road near Shalesmoor.

 

The cameras dont help catch the real criminals like those who steal cars and cause damage/death and have no insurance such as caused the death of an Oughtibridge woman recently.

 

Cameras also don't take the place of speed bumps as they are on free flowing roads usually not residential areas.

[spiffymonkey 10]

Originally posted by vision

Unfortunately chances are that good drivers will still get booked and some bad drivers will get away with it.

 

Some good drivers will get booked while some bad drivers will get away with it. No system will ever take into account how good a driver you are. You might not like it, I might not like it, but it's a fact. It's just something that you have to live with.

 

Cameras also don't take the place of speed bumps as they are on free flowing roads usually not residential areas.

 

That's the point; they should but they don't. See this thread:

 

http://sheffieldforum.co.uk/showthread.php?s=&threadid=330

 

I'm saying that it would be better to put the speed cameras where speed humps currently are, and no speed cameras on free flowing roads (e.g. Halifax Road).

[InvalidUser 10]

Originally posted by MobileB

I will not condone speeding, but how on earth can anyone support justice in that situation? Please someone tell me!

 

I know that 4 mph over the limit isn't much but there has to be a point at which the police prosecute. He was allegedly exceeding the limit by more than 10% so a ticket is to be expected.

 

If he will have difficulty paying the £60 out of his pension perhaps he could ask the court for more time to pay.

[Ravenger 10]

Originally posted by spiffymonkey

It's a well known fact that a car hitting someone at 35mph is twice as likely to kill someone than a car hitting someone at 30mph.

 

Quote from SafeSpeed:

http://www.safespeed.org.uk/lie.html

 

clarified The thirty-five mph lie

 

Examples

 

At 35mph you are twice as likely to kill someone as you are at 30mph. (official example)

 

At 20 mph 10% are killed

At 30 mph 50% are killed

At 40 mph 90% are killed

At 35 mph it takes an extra 21 feet to stop

Kill your speed or kill a child

 

Source

 

Ashton and Mackay 1979

 

Truth

 

It's a funny sort of lie this one. The figures and the claim are broadly true, it's just that free travelling speed and impact speed are almost unrelated to one another. Ashton's figures relate to vehicle speed at impact - but we're expected to assume that they refer to free travelling speeds.

 

We know from official figures from 2001 (for example) that 0.7% of child pedestrians injured in accidents with cars died. And we know that in 2001, 65% of cars at sample sites were exceeding the 30 mph speed limit. But the 0.7% of child pedestrians killed were in all speed limits. Clearly we would have expected more than half to be killed if the implied claim were true.

[tas1 10]

I think part of the post stated it was at 6:30AM - not likely to be many people about then, especially during the holidays.

 

BTW be warned - there's a mobile trap on the parkway every now and then. They park the van behind the manor park turn off sign, and the gun is placed just below the sign!

[D2J 10]

Originally posted by tas1

BTW be warned - there's a mobile trap on the parkway every now and then. They park the van behind the manor park turn off sign, and the gun is placed just below the sign!

 

Aye, this is true. Friend at work got stung by the gun on Sunday.. 62 in 50 zone

[MobileB 10]

Originally posted by Deejay

You won't condone speeding but your narked your dad has been done for 34mph in 30 zone ?

 

Ok its not excessive speed but in reality its still speeding above the set limit.. If it had been anyone else they would have got the same ticket and fine no doubt.. regardless of age

 

I will not condone speeding. I have deliberately not stated the location. Shall we just say it was not a built up area and it was not in South Yorkshire. But 6.30 am on the morning after boxing day. You can be sure it was packed full of pedestrians going about their business (if there is indeed a footpath for them to walk on where he was caught).

 

Oh, one other thing. It was a mobile camera not fixed camera.