S0 - More or less points for speeding...
Posted by: andy c on 24 January 2004
I was watching the news with interest when they were talking about the speeding debate. What the govnt are considering is 2 points instead of three for speeding dependant on time of day etc.
The fors and againsts comments were interesting, one was saying speeding kills and the points should stay as they are, the other was saying that the research into collision hotspots is inconclusive.
I personally think that the points should remain as they are, and if 4 strikes aren't enough (4 x 3=12 therefore ban) to get you to slow down...
so, what d'yall think?
The fors and againsts comments were interesting, one was saying speeding kills and the points should stay as they are, the other was saying that the research into collision hotspots is inconclusive.
I personally think that the points should remain as they are, and if 4 strikes aren't enough (4 x 3=12 therefore ban) to get you to slow down...
so, what d'yall think?
Posted on: 27 January 2004 by andy c
posted by Steve,
Not true, the law has just changed so the prosecution have to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that he had likleyhood of driving, as opposed to what it used to say that the defence had to prove beyond the balance of probability that he would not have any likleyhood of doing so.
posted by rockingdoc,
Quite right. funny how tho the gatso's and the like don't get everyone! If I get pinged I'll pay up. I was breaking the law and deserve the points/fine. Any I can hardly whinge about it if I know what the speed limit is, and then break it, can I?
Speed is a factor in collisions, just as alot of other area's are (distraction from within/outside the vehicle, not concentrating/following too close etc).
We have to drive within a system. There is one standard of driving legally that is applicable to all. That is referred to in the highway code. It doesn't need to mention speed camera's. The speed limit is just that, the limit. If you exceed it then provided its legally done if you get caught what really do you expect.?
Some people don't like that because of several reasons. So they exceed the limit/drive w'out due care and then when they do get caught they whinge. And its always the way they are caught that is at fault: camera's, plain police cars, cop behind a tree. and yet if the camera's are in view, people slow down... strange that...
[This message was edited by andy c on TUESDAY 27 January 2004 at 21:00.]
quote:
I agree except for the driver who has ordered a taxi but has gone to his car to get his coat and his bag.
Under our daft laws he will also lose his licence.
Not true, the law has just changed so the prosecution have to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that he had likleyhood of driving, as opposed to what it used to say that the defence had to prove beyond the balance of probability that he would not have any likleyhood of doing so.
posted by rockingdoc,
quote:
How we'll laugh when you get your first flashes. Unless you NEVER excede the speed limits (and if you claim so, I don't believe you), a camera will get you one day. Gatsos are only one type of camera in use.
Quite right. funny how tho the gatso's and the like don't get everyone! If I get pinged I'll pay up. I was breaking the law and deserve the points/fine. Any I can hardly whinge about it if I know what the speed limit is, and then break it, can I?
Speed is a factor in collisions, just as alot of other area's are (distraction from within/outside the vehicle, not concentrating/following too close etc).
We have to drive within a system. There is one standard of driving legally that is applicable to all. That is referred to in the highway code. It doesn't need to mention speed camera's. The speed limit is just that, the limit. If you exceed it then provided its legally done if you get caught what really do you expect.?
Some people don't like that because of several reasons. So they exceed the limit/drive w'out due care and then when they do get caught they whinge. And its always the way they are caught that is at fault: camera's, plain police cars, cop behind a tree. and yet if the camera's are in view, people slow down... strange that...
[This message was edited by andy c on TUESDAY 27 January 2004 at 21:00.]
Posted on: 27 January 2004 by MichaelC
quote:
Originally posted by Steven Toy:
At least in the UK we don't hide cameras in bins or under mail boxes on gate posts.
Steve.
Steve
I don't know about The Heart of England but over my way there are a number of cunningly placed (read hidden) cameras. The radar police also have a prediliction for hiding in hedges - they maybe looking for badgers?
Mike
Posted on: 28 January 2004 by Berlin Fritz
Very similar to an old GDR Vopo line, been caught many a time, innit.
Fritz Von Shabbynazitrick
Fritz Von Shabbynazitrick
Posted on: 28 January 2004 by Trevor Newall
Tony.
Basically, autobahns are as safe as your experience of them.
i travel all around Europe in my particular line of work, quite often by car, and when in Germany travel on the Autobahns. I have yet to see an accident or the lengthy hold ups caused by accidents/break downs that we get on our motorways here. why are our motorways nearly always full of bloody road works and cones?
I'm not saying there are no accidents or road works on Autobahns, but in Germany they seem to be able to deal with it all so much more efficiently.
Another thing I notice is how few break downs there are on motorways compared to here. it seems the Germans must maintain their cars better, make sure they're full with petrol before setting off, or perhaps just drive better cars than we do!
The amount of times i've sat in a motorway traffic jam because some arse has ran out of petrol, or broken down on the outside lane because their car isn't roadworthy, is ridiculous. who should pay for my lost time and earnings?
If I were transport minister I'd introduce an on the spot £500 fine for anyone who falls into either of those previous categories. maybe that would teach them?
Sorry, rant over.
TN
Basically, autobahns are as safe as your experience of them.
i travel all around Europe in my particular line of work, quite often by car, and when in Germany travel on the Autobahns. I have yet to see an accident or the lengthy hold ups caused by accidents/break downs that we get on our motorways here. why are our motorways nearly always full of bloody road works and cones?
I'm not saying there are no accidents or road works on Autobahns, but in Germany they seem to be able to deal with it all so much more efficiently.
Another thing I notice is how few break downs there are on motorways compared to here. it seems the Germans must maintain their cars better, make sure they're full with petrol before setting off, or perhaps just drive better cars than we do!
The amount of times i've sat in a motorway traffic jam because some arse has ran out of petrol, or broken down on the outside lane because their car isn't roadworthy, is ridiculous. who should pay for my lost time and earnings?
If I were transport minister I'd introduce an on the spot £500 fine for anyone who falls into either of those previous categories. maybe that would teach them?
Sorry, rant over.
TN
Posted on: 28 January 2004 by HTK
Good rant Trevor 
Posted on: 28 January 2004 by Rockingdoc
I agree. Poor people belong on the pavement, not blocking up my road with their rubbish cars. Why should I pay group 20 insurance just to have some cheap heap in my way.
Posted on: 28 January 2004 by Tony Lockhart
Now we're getting somewhere!
Tony
Tony
Posted on: 28 January 2004 by HTK
Quite right. They should marched over to the hard shoulder and shot. I mean, the CHEEK of it. Who do they think they are?
Posted on: 28 January 2004 by Steve B
Does that include Citroen ZX owners?
Steve B
Steve B
Posted on: 28 January 2004 by Tony Lockhart
Ok, so the more you pay for the car, the more weaponry you can fit! WOW, I like this.
Maybe all cheap cars should be painted beige and only have half the lights working so they're easier to target.
Tony
Maybe all cheap cars should be painted beige and only have half the lights working so they're easier to target.
Tony
Posted on: 28 January 2004 by andy c
Perhaps all mercedes should be supplied with 'LAWS' rocket launchers and gatlings as standard then? 
Posted on: 28 January 2004 by Martin D
Hey you lot
Get yer facts right. "Speed" accounts for about 7% of accidents. Read these sights carefully they all use government facts and stats:
http://www.safespeed.org.uk/
http://www.onethirdlie.org.uk/
http://www.abd.org.uk/
Happy reading - dont except this PC, local Govenernment, arent we saving lives, pat us on the back shite.
Martin
Get yer facts right. "Speed" accounts for about 7% of accidents. Read these sights carefully they all use government facts and stats:
http://www.safespeed.org.uk/
http://www.onethirdlie.org.uk/
http://www.abd.org.uk/
Happy reading - dont except this PC, local Govenernment, arent we saving lives, pat us on the back shite.
Martin
Posted on: 28 January 2004 by Trevor Newall
yes, and since we're on the subject of shooting people, can I include all Volvo drivers over the age of 50, and anyone who owns a pair of brown leather driving gloves?
TN
TN
Posted on: 28 January 2004 by Martin D
Trev
Those ones with holes where your nuckles are?
Martin
Those ones with holes where your nuckles are?
Martin
Posted on: 28 January 2004 by Tony Lockhart
I want a flame-thrower to destroy any car with neons.
Tony
Tony
Posted on: 31 January 2004 by Tony Lockhart
Well, if you really want to take it out on peasants, how about this. Warning, 12Mb.
http://www.telebyte.nl/~tonno/SyS/Car&Gun.wmv
Tony
http://www.telebyte.nl/~tonno/SyS/Car&Gun.wmv
Tony