Jump to content


Sign in to follow this  

Speeding Yet Again - They're Having A Laugh!

Recommended Posts

Thats different. Everyone KNOWS the speed limit. If you dont, how did you pass your test!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Originally posted by MobileB

Ok i will not give you the full story.

 

The incident happened at 6.30 am on Dec 27. He had driven through a small village where the speed limit was 30 mph either side of a national speed limit area.

 

Why not just reveal the name of the village where the speed trap was situated ? why the big secret ? after all the safety camera partnership publish where these mobile traps are to be located.

 

By revealing the location it will prevent other motorists from suffering the misfortune that your father has encounted, Im always open in warning people about the mobile camera operating on the parkway for instance.

 

 

MobileB pm'd, fully appreciate reasons why, cheers

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Originally posted by mega_monty

Why not just reveal the name of the village where the speed trap was situated ? why the big secret ? after all the safety camera partnership publish where these mobile traps are to be located.

 

By revealing the location it will prevent other motorists from suffering the misfortune that your father has encounted, Im always open in warning people about the mobile camera operating on the parkway for instance.

 

I've pm'd you why Monty. Hope you understand.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Originally posted by Mooseyb

Thats different. Everyone KNOWS the speed limit. If you dont, how did you pass your test!

 

Unlike my father, I do. Travel 20000 miles a year and have a perfectly clean license.

 

But I do confess today to blocking a yellow box. Total accident. The car in front of me stopped about two car lengths behind another one. A camera (and they say the are putting them in yellow boxes) would have caught me and fined me and possibly put points on my license. A traffic officer would have seen what the car in front had done and reacted accordingly.

 

But I suppose the Law is the Law.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Originally posted by Whelk

Actually I think the odds are probably even higher. I would love to monitor your car on one simple journey across town, noting every single time you transgressed a minor rule such as right of way, amber/red light, sitting on a the edge of a yellow box etc. etc. Be honest with yourself, you are not whiter than snow. How many times have you driven at 34mph (or quicker) in a 30mph limit? If you were 3 pointed on EVERY occasion you would be out of work within a month or probably even less.

 

Now I am not saying that these are 'acts of God' of course you are responsible for your own behavior but luck shouldn't be a part of it. Now if your 15K miles are year are mainly motorway driving you will accept that the odds on getting a camera trap is a lot less that town or city driving. If you were to be doing 45K miles a year urban driving (as a lot of delivery drivers do) then by your own record and a little bad luck you would be in danger of losing your license.

I stand by what I said.

 

For God's sake - not this old 'speed trap' chestnut again!!:rolleyes:

 

And in answer to Whelk, I could drive for 100 (or more) without breaking a law - don't tar everyone with your own failings.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Originally posted by MobileB

Unlike my father, I do. Travel 20000 miles a year and have a perfectly clean license.

 

But I do confess today to blocking a yellow box. Total accident. The car in front of me stopped about two car lengths behind another one. A camera (and they say the are putting them in yellow boxes) would have caught me and fined me and possibly put points on my license. A traffic officer would have seen what the car in front had done and reacted accordingly.

 

But I suppose the Law is the Law.

 

Two things there. If he doesnt know the speed limits, should he be driving?

 

And secondly, yes, the law is the law. Doesnt matter if the car in front was too stupid to pull forward, the fact remains that you could have waited till you could clearly leave the box junction (as it states in the highway code), and then entered it. I seem to remember the highway code says "do not enter a box junction until your exit is clear". Seems straightforward to me. Traffic law violation = penalty.

 

Im sorry but you wont persuade me, or many others that your father is innocent. Its one speeding fine. Its not a conviction for murder. Live with it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Originally posted by Mooseyb

Two things there. If he doesnt know the speed limits, should he be driving?

 

And secondly, yes, the law is the law. Doesnt matter if the car in front was too stupid to pull forward, the fact remains that you could have waited till you could clearly leave the box junction (as it states in the highway code), and then entered it. I seem to remember the highway code says "do not enter a box junction until your exit is clear". Seems straightforward to me. Traffic law violation = penalty.

 

Im sorry but you wont persuade me, or many others that your father is innocent. Its one speeding fine. Its not a conviction for murder. Live with it.

 

and i suppose people with your black and white view of the world are the reason behind the proliferation of automated systems to punish minor infringements.

Do you view everything in life as so black and white or can you see the shades of grey sometimes?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes thanks I can see plenty of things in grey, however the fact remains that someone who breaks a law should be punished for breaking that law accordingly. If I speed, I take the risk of being punished for speeding. If I steal, I take the risk of punishment.

 

Yes there is mitigation, but the fact remains, and it is a fact that you cannot dispute, that a law has been broken. Its that simple.

 

Question for you then. If you allow one pensioner to escape punishment for whatever reason, where do you draw the line? Can then a pregnant mother be allowed the same liberty? What about a disabled driver? A nun? Where does it stop?

 

The whole point behind fixed penalty offences is that they are minor and clear cut. You have either committed the offence or you havent. Fixed penalties free up Court time to deal with more important matters, where the "shades of grey" you mention can be considered. Yes there are a lot more issues to consider in more serious offences. I deal with them all day every day, but motoring is simply down to fact.

 

If you want Courts or fine staff to consider one person raising an issue, everyone caught speeding will try it on. You will open the floodgates. Then more staff will be needed to consider these issues. Who is going to pay for that do you think? Higher taxes? Higher speeding fines? You? I suspect its one of the first two. Someone here said a few weeks ago that they would argue a fine because the Courts havent the time to bother investigating it. Quite right, they havent. They have more serious things to deal with.

 

Thats why traffic offences are black and white.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Originally posted by Saxon

For God's sake - not this old 'speed trap' chestnut again!!:rolleyes:

 

And in answer to Whelk, I could drive for 100 (or more) without breaking a law - don't tar everyone with your own failings.

 

yea, yea, yea, you are the bestest driver in the world.

Even the President of the Advanced Institute of Motorists lost his licence in camera traps.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2-1414609,00.html

 

I am not tarring anyone with my failings but I am being honest, try being honest with yourself because I do not believe that you have NEVER broken a traffic law ever, it simply isn't possible. Yes I could do 100 miles on a motorway but 100 miles of urban driving? Let me put you in East London with the mission to drive to West London right through the centre and see if you break any laws. You know and I know that it is not possible so before disputing what I say try to be really honest with yourself as we all know that even with excellent training driving instructors are just fallable humans.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Originally posted by InvalidUser

 

The people I know who drive for living, including a couple of taxi drivers, manage to do their job and hold on to their licences.

 

Well aren't you the luckiest person around with the luckiest mates including lucky taxi drivers.

The PRESIDENT of the Institute of advanced motorists wasn't so lucky.

 

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2-1414609,00.html

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Originally posted by Whelk

100 miles of urban driving? Let me put you in East London with the mission to drive to West London right through the centre and see if you break any laws. You know and I know that it is not

Of course it is possible, to say that it isn't is ludicrous.

 

Just as ludicrous as suggesting it isn't possible to slow down from a national limit to 30 for a small village and then speed back up AFTER the national speed limit sign.

 

MobileB, if your father saw the van, didn't it occur to him it could've been a speed camera van, or perhaps a delivery driver (maybe half asleep) just about to pull out, someone with a good driving record in that circumstance *might* slow down a bit to just to be safe.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Originally posted by Mooseyb

Yes thanks I can see plenty of things in grey, however the fact remains that someone who breaks a law should be punished for breaking that law accordingly. If I speed, I take the risk of being punished for speeding. If I steal, I take the risk of punishment.

 

Yes there is mitigation, but the fact remains, and it is a fact that you cannot dispute, that a law has been broken. Its that simple.

 

Question for you then. If you allow one pensioner to escape punishment for whatever reason, where do you draw the line? Can then a pregnant mother be allowed the same liberty? What about a disabled driver? A nun? Where does it stop?

 

The whole point behind fixed penalty offences is that they are minor and clear cut. You have either committed the offence or you havent. Fixed penalties free up Court time to deal with more important matters, where the "shades of grey" you mention can be considered. Yes there are a lot more issues to consider in more serious offences. I deal with them all day every day, but motoring is simply down to fact.

 

If you want Courts or fine staff to consider one person raising an issue, everyone caught speeding will try it on. You will open the floodgates. Then more staff will be needed to consider these issues. Who is going to pay for that do you think? Higher taxes? Higher speeding fines? You? I suspect its one of the first two. Someone here said a few weeks ago that they would argue a fine because the Courts havent the time to bother investigating it. Quite right, they havent. They have more serious things to deal with.

 

Thats why traffic offences are black and white.

 

Which is not disputed Moose. But there is no grey and the punishment takes absolutely nothing into account.

 

A young driver with 6 months experience gets the same punishment as someone with 50 years unblemished (lucky or not lukcy). I accept that tottting up is means less experienced driver can accumulate less points before a ban but the punishment for the offence - 3pts, £60, is the same irrespective.

 

Similarly, at £60 you are taking approximately 60% of a pensioners weekly allowance to pay for the fine. That would be like fining someone who earns £20,000 a year £330 or even someone on £10,000 being fined £115. Calculate 60% of your own weekly wage, how much would you pay, and then do you think it is fair?

 

It seems strange that a government that is so keen on means testing people with a 24 page form to fill in to receive about £6 pension credit a week, can issue straight fines that are simple (to free up court time!).

 

But as people say on here. The Law is the Law. It doesnt make it right though does it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.

X