Caught at 97mph
Caught at 97mph
Well, the title says it all.
I'm not proud of it. On the way to Inverness for a festival, the hood was down, the sun was shining and the roads were clear, long and straight. On one particularly good section of dual carriageway (70mph) I never saw the camera van parked in the layby until it was too late.
Well today the NIP dropped through the door. 97mph in a 70mph zone. This is all new to me, and I've a clean license since passing my test 12 years ago. Everything was going great until I got that damn Zed
Obviously I'll be taking the hit and chalking it down to experience. What I'm looking for here is an idea of what I can expect. The FAQ that came with the NIP states that I can expect an offer of £60 and 3 points. That seems a little lenient considering my speed, but I'd be over the moon if that were the case.
Is that the most likely outcome? I know I'm a silly boy and deserve everything I get, but the thought of a ban makes me sick.
Erd
I'm not proud of it. On the way to Inverness for a festival, the hood was down, the sun was shining and the roads were clear, long and straight. On one particularly good section of dual carriageway (70mph) I never saw the camera van parked in the layby until it was too late.
Well today the NIP dropped through the door. 97mph in a 70mph zone. This is all new to me, and I've a clean license since passing my test 12 years ago. Everything was going great until I got that damn Zed
Obviously I'll be taking the hit and chalking it down to experience. What I'm looking for here is an idea of what I can expect. The FAQ that came with the NIP states that I can expect an offer of £60 and 3 points. That seems a little lenient considering my speed, but I'd be over the moon if that were the case.
Is that the most likely outcome? I know I'm a silly boy and deserve everything I get, but the thought of a ban makes me sick.
Erd
Re: Caught at 97mph
Start bargaining, say that you'd consider £20 and 1 point and then try to meet somewhere in the middle.erdnase wrote:The FAQ that came with the NIP states that I can expect an offer of £60 and 3 points.
<hr>
<img border="0" src="http://www.asnb84.dsl.pipex.com/Video/signature.jpg" width="213" height="84">
<img border="0" src="http://www.asnb84.dsl.pipex.com/Video/signature.jpg" width="213" height="84">
I'm happy to have been caught by a camera. If it had been a traffic car that stopped me, they would have seen I had 4 bald tyres and was twice over the drink limit.Robin wrote:They choose a safe empty bit of road to nab you. It's more to do with entrapment & income generation than policing the roads to make them safer
Joking obviously, but I'm kinda pragmatic about it. I knew the consequences of being nabbed before I put the foot down, so I can't really complain. I did read that the camera partnerships are more interested in getting money (revenue streams and all that) than points/bans, etc, so if you are going to get caught, better a camera partnership than a traffic car.
Erd
Re: Caught at 97mph
The 'offer' of £60 and 3 points is 'take this or we'll see you in court', which means more points and bigger fine. At 97 I'd be grabbing the 3pts with both hands............QED wrote:Start bargaining, say that you'd consider £20 and 1 point and then try to meet somewhere in the middle.erdnase wrote:The FAQ that came with the NIP states that I can expect an offer of £60 and 3 points.
As of Feb this year when the Road Safety Act came into play, radar detectors etc are ILLEGAL, including those items with 'alternate uses' such as garage door openers. You have been warned........
Rob
In God We Trust - everyone else gets PNC'd.
Re: Caught at 97mph
This is rather unfair, isn't it? so it's ok for them to trap/catch a speeding driver but not ok for them to know that may be about to be caught/trapped - ok so u might say they shouldn't be speeding in the first place and fair comment that is, but say they are and suddenly they see the camera van or the man with the laser gun and slam on the breaks out of instinct to reduce their speed - this is far more likely to cause an accident/pile up (very possibley fatal), than if they detected a camera and slowed down in due time! so where is the logic in calling it Road Safety Act if by nature of what they are doing, they are endangering the driver and other motorists!RobBruce wrote:
As of Feb this year when the Road Safety Act came into play, radar detectors etc are ILLEGAL, including those items with 'alternate uses' such as garage door openers. You have been warned........
Rob
....I thought most use laser rather then radar guns now anyway so a detector might not have saved you. Laser detectors are a waste of time IMHO anyway - by the time your detector has gone off they've already got your speed.
I agree with Rob - I wouldn't even think about contesting 3 points and £60 for 27mph over the limit. I think it's only a guideline but generally if you were 30mph or more over the limit they would have strung you up by the goolies
Shocking sometimes to think how ridiculously easily the M pulls 100mph+ though. Can't wait for the Autobahns in a couple of weeks
I agree with Rob - I wouldn't even think about contesting 3 points and £60 for 27mph over the limit. I think it's only a guideline but generally if you were 30mph or more over the limit they would have strung you up by the goolies
Shocking sometimes to think how ridiculously easily the M pulls 100mph+ though. Can't wait for the Autobahns in a couple of weeks
Sapphire Black 02 S54 M Roadster
- whiteminks
- Joined: Tue 26 Sep, 2006 09:58
- Posts: 2768
- Location: Lincoln
Oh dear , please not another speeding trap debate/punch up .........
My nerves can't take it after last time
http://www.zroadster.net/forum/viewtopi ... ed+cameras
Not quite the same context but you get the drift
My nerves can't take it after last time
http://www.zroadster.net/forum/viewtopi ... ed+cameras
Not quite the same context but you get the drift
big cheesy wrote:'I nearly cacked my trolleys till I quickly tuned in'. Yorkshire Cruise 2008.
Re: Caught at 97mph
<SIGH>BimBeema wrote:This is rather unfair, isn't it? so it's ok for them to trap/catch a speeding driver but not ok for them to know that may be about to be caught/trapped - ok so u might say they shouldn't be speeding in the first place and fair comment that is, but say they are and suddenly they see the camera van or the man with the laser gun and slam on the breaks out of instinct to reduce their speed - this is far more likely to cause an accident/pile up (very possibley fatal), than if they detected a camera and slowed down in due time! so where is the logic in calling it Road Safety Act if by nature of what they are doing, they are endangering the driver and other motorists!RobBruce wrote:
As of Feb this year when the Road Safety Act came into play, radar detectors etc are ILLEGAL, including those items with 'alternate uses' such as garage door openers. You have been warned........
Rob
I'm not going to go over all this again, but I'll make 3 points ( )
1 - Exactly - don't speed and you wont get caught
2 - 'Suddenly' seeing a camera means you're not paying attention in the first place
3 - Read the Act - DETECTORS are illegal, GPS systems aren't.
Rob
In God We Trust - everyone else gets PNC'd.
Re: Caught at 97mph
Echo!RobBruce wrote:<SIGH>BimBeema wrote:This is rather unfair, isn't it? so it's ok for them to trap/catch a speeding driver but not ok for them to know that may be about to be caught/trapped - ok so u might say they shouldn't be speeding in the first place and fair comment that is, but say they are and suddenly they see the camera van or the man with the laser gun and slam on the breaks out of instinct to reduce their speed - this is far more likely to cause an accident/pile up (very possibley fatal), than if they detected a camera and slowed down in due time! so where is the logic in calling it Road Safety Act if by nature of what they are doing, they are endangering the driver and other motorists!RobBruce wrote:
As of Feb this year when the Road Safety Act came into play, radar detectors etc are ILLEGAL, including those items with 'alternate uses' such as garage door openers. You have been warned........
Rob
I'm not going to go over all this again, but I'll make 3 points ( )
1 - Exactly - don't speed and you wont get caught
2 - 'Suddenly' seeing a camera means you're not paying attention in the first place
3 - Read the Act - DETECTORS are illegal, GPS systems aren't.
Rob
They don't trap/catch someone - they have to have warning signs displayed and are not hidden - if a driver doesnt see them the question is are they paying attention - and if they are speeding then so be it - expect to be getting points or a court appearance.
Re: Caught at 97mph
I don't disagree with some of what you are saying but I deliberately didn't say cameras (i.e. Gatso) as they are usually signposted, even if some of the signs are behind bushes or trees, however I'm yet to see a sign to say there's a mobile camera van ahead or beware of mobile camera vans or traffic cars with laser guns, etc, so what tends to happen is you only notice them when you get close enough, which if you happen to be speeding is then too late and so many times I've come round a roundabout and there they are behind roundabouts catching people with no sign posts and yes I agree that one shouldn't speed in the first place but if they are which I'm sure most people do at one point or another then this is not really the safest way to go about it as it can cause more accidents than it helps avoid, not to mention the money generating scheme that it has now become!RobBruce wrote:
<SIGH>
I'm not going to go over all this again, but I'll make 3 points ( )
1 - Exactly - don't speed and you wont get caught
2 - 'Suddenly' seeing a camera means you're not paying attention in the first place
3 - Read the Act - DETECTORS are illegal, GPS systems aren't.
Rob
Anyway, who am I disagree with the law makers - they are a law upon themselves!
You say 70mph dual carraigeway.......Was this a motorway?
As the national limit for other roads is 60mph AFAIK, therefore 37mph over the limit...............anyway £60 and 3 points is fair
Gazza.
As the national limit for other roads is 60mph AFAIK, therefore 37mph over the limit...............anyway £60 and 3 points is fair
Gazza.
Gazza
"Understeer is when you hit the wall with the front of the car, oversteer is when you hit the wall with the rear of the car. Horsepower is how fast you hit the wall and torque is how far you take the wall with you"
Z3 S54 M roadster , BMW Z1, BMW M3 CSL, Z4M Coupe
"Understeer is when you hit the wall with the front of the car, oversteer is when you hit the wall with the rear of the car. Horsepower is how fast you hit the wall and torque is how far you take the wall with you"
Z3 S54 M roadster , BMW Z1, BMW M3 CSL, Z4M Coupe
Thanks for all the advice and coments guys.
I did look at PepiPoo website, and whilst all the "don't sign the NIP" type pieces of advice are interesting, but I think I'll take the hit this time. £60 and 3 points isn't anything to lose sleep over, especially given the fact it was 97mph.
The only thing that worries me is that the yellow sheet that arrived with the NIP seems to be a standard, non-specific thing. It does say though that once I return the NIP, I will receive a conditional offer. It states "The fine is £60. You will also receive 3 points on your license", so I'm taking that to mean that's the punishment. IE, there's no way they can turn round and tell me it's £300 and 6 points or something once I return the NIP. Or can they?
Erd
I did look at PepiPoo website, and whilst all the "don't sign the NIP" type pieces of advice are interesting, but I think I'll take the hit this time. £60 and 3 points isn't anything to lose sleep over, especially given the fact it was 97mph.
The only thing that worries me is that the yellow sheet that arrived with the NIP seems to be a standard, non-specific thing. It does say though that once I return the NIP, I will receive a conditional offer. It states "The fine is £60. You will also receive 3 points on your license", so I'm taking that to mean that's the punishment. IE, there's no way they can turn round and tell me it's £300 and 6 points or something once I return the NIP. Or can they?
Erd
Re: Caught at 97mph
RobBruce wrote:2 - 'Suddenly' seeing a camera means you're not paying attention in the first place.
Can't go with this I'm afraid.madmare wrote:Echo!
They don't trap/catch someone - they have to have warning signs displayed and are not hidden.
On the motorway, I've never seen any warning signs and whenever you see a yellow van it's always a shock, no matter how quickly you spot it, how far away it is or what speed you're doing.
The kneejerk will always be to check your speed (ie: look away from the road) AND to hit (or at least feather) the brake, causing possible problems for other drivers around you who might not anticipate it.
And meanwhile, the drunkard who's been banned ten times, with bald tyres and no insurance, wobbles past without a care in the world.
Also, beware. The anti-car brigade are currently campaigning for a return to the underhanded covert steath methods where all warning signage and the yellow backs from fixed cameras will be removed and it will be acceptable for mobile cameras to hide behind bushes or in a butcher's van without ANY warning signs and without ANY previous accidents at the spot.
And with this government's talent for pandering to screaming minorities, there's a high chance that we'll have this and more forced down our throats.
Ta.
A.
Last edited by Alfie on Thu 14 Jun, 2007 21:00, edited 1 time in total.
Nope - not illegal. 904 Nm is a public wavelength which is not solely used by the police. Not a single case has ever been brought against anyone having a garage opener that works as it has been described. Also note that the Nissan cruise distance control also works on 904 Nm, so therefore has the same side effects as the garage openers.RobBruce wrote:including those items with 'alternate uses' such as garage door openers.Robin wrote:What about laser parking distance sensors that just happen to also defeat laser guns. Are they illegal Rob ?
Yep
There has been a single case in the UK where someone with a jammer had been prosecuted. But he only had a jammer which had no other use so he got tried for "perverting the cause" but even that case never lead to a conviction.
Alfie - it is already the case as of last month that they can put traps anywhere they like. They were even boasting that they would put two traps a few hundred yards apart so that in case a driver saw the first one, they would be caught by the second one.
The rule that so many accidents had to have happened on a piece of road also no longer applies. They can do whatever they want, whereever they want whenever they want.
The rule that so many accidents had to have happened on a piece of road also no longer applies. They can do whatever they want, whereever they want whenever they want.
Only if signposted as National Speed Limit, otherwise it is whatever limit has been arbitrarily set - anything from 30 to 60!Alfie wrote:National speed limit on a dual carriageway is 70mph for a car.
Why can't we have the speed limit written on the back of the camera in huge letters? It annoys me that it is likely to be those that don't know the area and so don't deliberately slow down for cameras are the ones that are likely to get caught.
I nearly ended up embedded in the back of a van the other day - why? - he braked hard for a camera in a 60 limit - and he was only doing 40 - but as he was clearly unaware of the speed limit, upon seeing the camera he just panic braked - thankfully I wasn't following too closely. If the camera had 60 written on it, then that wouldn't have happened.
As to hidden scamera vans - go play the spot the scamera game on one of the anti-speed camera sites - they are anything but clearly marked.
Cheers R.
Arctic Silver '99 Z3 1.9 & Black '59 Frogeye 1275cc
Yes, it is.PVR wrote:Nope - not illegal. 904 Nm is a public wavelength which is not solely used by the police. Not a single case has ever been brought against anyone having a garage opener that works as it has been described. Also note that the Nissan cruise distance control also works on 904 Nm, so therefore has the same side effects as the garage openers.RobBruce wrote:including those items with 'alternate uses' such as garage door openers.Robin wrote:What about laser parking distance sensors that just happen to also defeat laser guns. Are they illegal Rob ?
Yep
There has been a single case in the UK where someone with a jammer had been prosecuted. But he only had a jammer which had no other use so he got tried for "perverting the cause" but even that case never lead to a conviction.
Road Safety Act 2006, came in Feb this year, so no-one will have prosecuted under the new specific offences yet.
http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts2006/60049--a.htm#18
""speed assessment equipment detection device" means a device the purpose, or one of the purposes, of which is to detect, or interfere with the operation of, equipment used to assess the speed of motor vehicles."
In God We Trust - everyone else gets PNC'd.
I must read the Book Thanks mateAlfie wrote:Gazza....garythefish wrote:As the national limit for other roads is 60mph AFAIK, therefore 37mph over the limit...............anyway £60 and 3 points is fair.
National speed limit on a dual carriageway is 70mph for a car.
Single carriageway is 60mph.
A.
Gazza.
Gazza
"Understeer is when you hit the wall with the front of the car, oversteer is when you hit the wall with the rear of the car. Horsepower is how fast you hit the wall and torque is how far you take the wall with you"
Z3 S54 M roadster , BMW Z1, BMW M3 CSL, Z4M Coupe
"Understeer is when you hit the wall with the front of the car, oversteer is when you hit the wall with the rear of the car. Horsepower is how fast you hit the wall and torque is how far you take the wall with you"
Z3 S54 M roadster , BMW Z1, BMW M3 CSL, Z4M Coupe
Is the penalty for having one greater than the penalty of being caught, also can't these be hidden. If due to having a detector they don't catch you speeding they would have no cause to suspect a detector, so it wouldn't be found.As of Feb this year when the Road Safety Act came into play, radar detectors etc are ILLEGAL, including those items with 'alternate uses' such as garage door openers. You have been warned........
I'm not condoning speeding but sensible driving on good clear roads in a modern car with good brakes.... Yeah I know if the law were left for us to interpret as we see fit it would be a mess.
Thing is the current 70mph limit came in in 1967 when the average car could barely do 70, highway code states 315 feet to stop from 70, I bet an M could do it in half that.
Rob sorry I don't mean for you to bear the brunt of this - you must get it in the neck every time this comes up.
Realistically, the chance of being stopped is fairly small, isn't it. I have never, ever been stopped (touch wood). With the current view that they can reach their revenue targets of 60 tickets a month by sitting in their car having a coffee whilst snapping away they would not bother to go after someone because they "suddenly" slow down.
Look at the mobile phone usage in the car - daily, I say so many people still using phones and they don't get caught when it is blatenly obvious - so what is the chance that you get stopped for having a (concealed) unit somewhere in the car?
In my case - I have insurance on three cars. One ticket would mean an increase of say £300 per year if not more. With my wife's single speeding ticket of 36 in a 30 zone 3 years ago, the insurance on my M would be £250 higher per year so she is not insurred on that. You would be mad not have protection / detection equipment nowadays. The rewards outway the risk by a warp factor
Look at the mobile phone usage in the car - daily, I say so many people still using phones and they don't get caught when it is blatenly obvious - so what is the chance that you get stopped for having a (concealed) unit somewhere in the car?
In my case - I have insurance on three cars. One ticket would mean an increase of say £300 per year if not more. With my wife's single speeding ticket of 36 in a 30 zone 3 years ago, the insurance on my M would be £250 higher per year so she is not insurred on that. You would be mad not have protection / detection equipment nowadays. The rewards outway the risk by a warp factor
""speed assessment equipment detection device" means a device the purpose, or one of the purposes, of which is to detect, or interfere with the operation of, equipment used to assess the speed of motor vehicles."
But it's a distance park sensor your honour.
I don't see how the police could prove in court it was intended to be used as anything else.
But it's a distance park sensor your honour.
I don't see how the police could prove in court it was intended to be used as anything else.
'High G' motoring enthusiast
You're a (reasonably) intelligent, professional, mature person driving a (reasonably) expensive high performance enthusiast's BMW sports car.Robin wrote:I don't see how the police could prove in court it was intended to be used as anything else.
It's highly unlikely you would be unaware of the effects of this hardware.
The magistrates might notice this....
A.
Only 'reasonably intelligent'Alfie wrote:You're a (reasonably) intelligent, professional, mature person driving a (reasonably) expensive high performance enthusiast's BMW sports car.Robin wrote:I don't see how the police could prove in court it was intended to be used as anything else.
It's highly unlikely you would be unaware of the effects of this hardware.
The magistrates might notice this....
A.
'High G' motoring enthusiast
- PhoenixCoupe
- Joined: Wed 02 May, 2007 00:46
- Posts: 739
- Location: Mars
For those saying that speed cameras etc should be clearly marked where they are, etc...
Should all other criminal activities also come with warning signs that you may be caught and prosecuted?
Simple answer - if you don't break the law, you don't get into trouble.
There's also no such thing as an instant driving ban regardless of what speed you are doing.
Should all other criminal activities also come with warning signs that you may be caught and prosecuted?
Simple answer - if you don't break the law, you don't get into trouble.
There's also no such thing as an instant driving ban regardless of what speed you are doing.
押忍!闘え!応援団
-
- Joined: Thu 10 Aug, 2006 19:51
- Posts: 391
- Location: Teesside
IF YOU CANT DEAL WITH THE CONSEQUENCES OF GETTING CAUGHT...DONT SPEED. SURELY ITS NOT DIFFICULT TO COMPREHEND.
As far as moaning about speed camera's/traps. What do you expect the police to do? Just not enforce the law? Turn a blind eye?
If you cant see the speed camera till its too late, what else dont you see? Either slow down or improve your observation.
As far as moaning about speed camera's/traps. What do you expect the police to do? Just not enforce the law? Turn a blind eye?
If you cant see the speed camera till its too late, what else dont you see? Either slow down or improve your observation.
-
- Joined: Thu 10 Aug, 2006 19:51
- Posts: 391
- Location: Teesside
Ditto, I was trying to explain that a few weeks ago on a previous thread re speeding..PhoenixCoupe wrote:For those saying that speed cameras etc should be clearly marked where they are, etc...
Should all other criminal activities also come with warning signs that you may be caught and prosecuted?
If a shop does not have a sign saying "shoplifters will be prosecuted" does that mean its Ok to steal??????
In an ideal world, all laws would be enforced and everyone that did anything wrong would be captured / prosecuted. You do something wrong, you get caught, you get punished.
Now look at the reality. Do all burglars get caught? Nope, do all other serious offenders? Nope. That is where the issue lies. For a minor infringement - all manpower is used to detect an offence which has little or no impact on society as a whole. That is the unfair part.
Take another case. It is an offence not to (fully) pay your council tax or tv license. What if all resources available would be used to get every offender who has not paid or does not have a valid tv license. They are all offending, but is it right / sensible to allocate way to much resources to deal with it? In the overal scheme of crime - it is not important enough to allocate a huge amount of manpower to it.
However, when it comes to cars - everything is allowed. Why???
The whole issue is about unfairness and the allocation of resources to something which does not affect society as a whole whilst more important matters are not dealt with due to lack of resource/money. Wll, let me make the obvious suggestion here then ...
In NL, the use of radar detectors was outlawed a few years ago. However, again a case of a garage opener was brought to court and the police lost as the function of the garage opener was exactly that - an opener. They also cited the active cruise control from Nissan in that case. I know that is the verdict in another country, however it gives comfort that those type of cases are and will be lost.
Whoever the first person is to be stopped in the UK (has not happened since february yet so I guess they know / feel uncomfortable about it) - that person will get a huge support / finance sponsership to fight the case as manufacturers and hundreds / thousands of users in the country would be looking at that case very closely.
Now look at the reality. Do all burglars get caught? Nope, do all other serious offenders? Nope. That is where the issue lies. For a minor infringement - all manpower is used to detect an offence which has little or no impact on society as a whole. That is the unfair part.
Take another case. It is an offence not to (fully) pay your council tax or tv license. What if all resources available would be used to get every offender who has not paid or does not have a valid tv license. They are all offending, but is it right / sensible to allocate way to much resources to deal with it? In the overal scheme of crime - it is not important enough to allocate a huge amount of manpower to it.
However, when it comes to cars - everything is allowed. Why???
The whole issue is about unfairness and the allocation of resources to something which does not affect society as a whole whilst more important matters are not dealt with due to lack of resource/money. Wll, let me make the obvious suggestion here then ...
In NL, the use of radar detectors was outlawed a few years ago. However, again a case of a garage opener was brought to court and the police lost as the function of the garage opener was exactly that - an opener. They also cited the active cruise control from Nissan in that case. I know that is the verdict in another country, however it gives comfort that those type of cases are and will be lost.
Whoever the first person is to be stopped in the UK (has not happened since february yet so I guess they know / feel uncomfortable about it) - that person will get a huge support / finance sponsership to fight the case as manufacturers and hundreds / thousands of users in the country would be looking at that case very closely.
Yes, I do, and I'm getting pretty sick of it. I don't mind giving people advice, but I joined this forum as a 'Z community', not as a legal beagle and not as a soundboard for everyone who's p155ed off because they got caught speeding or are fed up with the law.Kipper wrote:Rob sorry I don't mean for you to bear the brunt of this - you must get it in the neck every time this comes up.
I don't make the rules, I don't agree with some of them, but that's tough. Everyone knows the speed limits. If you don't, read the Highway Code again.
If you break them, that's your choice. Just don't cry like a 6yr old girl when you get caught.
Rob
In God We Trust - everyone else gets PNC'd.
YES!PhoenixCoupe wrote:For those saying that speed cameras etc should be clearly marked where they are, etc...
Should all other criminal activities also come with warning signs that you may be caught and prosecuted?
If there are police everywhere with camers up saying DONT MURDER PEOPLE then people stop murdering people. Wheras when you hide a camera, the crime/offense happens and then you get punished? What works better?
Yeah, sorry Alfie, mate! I read your post a bit quickly. I was just trying to emphasise that not ALL dual carriageways are national speed limit.Alfie wrote:Robert T wrote:Only if signposted as National Speed Limit.Alfie wrote:National speed limit on a dual carriageway is 70mph for a car.
Erm, I think that's what I said, wasn't it?
Cheers R.
Arctic Silver '99 Z3 1.9 & Black '59 Frogeye 1275cc
- PhoenixCoupe
- Joined: Wed 02 May, 2007 00:46
- Posts: 739
- Location: Mars
Plenty of people get attacked (and sometimes murdered) in full view of CCTV cameras. Even when the assailant is fully aware they are there. So it doesn't stop them as you suggest it would. Trust me, I've seen it happen plenty of times.
If you break the law and get caught, don't expect any sympathy at all
If you break the law and get caught, don't expect any sympathy at all
押忍!闘え!応援団
But can you think of another law where you have to be constantly vigilant so as not to break it?PhoenixCoupe wrote:For those saying that speed cameras etc should be clearly marked where they are, etc...
Should all other criminal activities also come with warning signs that you may be caught and prosecuted?
Unless you are certified insane, you don't have to walk down the street saying to yourself, "Don't murder him, don't shoot her, don't steal that car....."
<hr>
<img border="0" src="http://www.asnb84.dsl.pipex.com/Video/signature.jpg" width="213" height="84">
<img border="0" src="http://www.asnb84.dsl.pipex.com/Video/signature.jpg" width="213" height="84">
Rob - sorry mate - we're not having a go at you - no one blames you for the law being what it is, its not your fault, your just doing your job.
PheonixCoupe - I don't think the argument is about wanting sympathy - no one here has asked for any - the conversation was about a number of other points, some of which are:
1) The length that this government goes to enforce this law compared to enforcing other laws and catching real criminals!
2) The underhanded tactics they use to catch people (i.e. hiding behind bushes or roundabouts in unmarked vans, where they can't be seen) when the person they catch is most likely a genarally law abiding citizen who just happens to be enjoying driving their car abit quicker than they should be, instead of catching the real criminals out there!
3) using the road safety act/slogan to enforce this when infact by the nature of what they are doing they are putting the driver and other motorists in danger!
4) the money making scheme that it has become - i.e. they no longer have to use it in accident blackspots, but wherever they can hide better or know that there is a nice clear stretch where drivers are more likely to speed, hence greater chance of them catching drivers, therefore generating more money! (i.e. less about actual road safety, more about money)
5) making illegal the use of detectors and alike when they would actually help the driver to slow down in due time rather than slam on the breaks like most people do when they see a camera van or traffic car or such, surely this is safer, but it wouldn't generate as much money, hence its illegal to use!
This is just some of it! No one is saying you should speed or break the law and if you do, yes its your own fault and you should accept it, however it does seem rather unfair when you compare the effort put in to enforce this compared to solving other real crimes or even say controlling the yob culture of our society where people are stabbing and shooting each other left, right & centre and nothing is being done because the givernment is too busy with the money it makes from the poor drivers who just happened to be going a bit faster than he should have!
PheonixCoupe - I don't think the argument is about wanting sympathy - no one here has asked for any - the conversation was about a number of other points, some of which are:
1) The length that this government goes to enforce this law compared to enforcing other laws and catching real criminals!
2) The underhanded tactics they use to catch people (i.e. hiding behind bushes or roundabouts in unmarked vans, where they can't be seen) when the person they catch is most likely a genarally law abiding citizen who just happens to be enjoying driving their car abit quicker than they should be, instead of catching the real criminals out there!
3) using the road safety act/slogan to enforce this when infact by the nature of what they are doing they are putting the driver and other motorists in danger!
4) the money making scheme that it has become - i.e. they no longer have to use it in accident blackspots, but wherever they can hide better or know that there is a nice clear stretch where drivers are more likely to speed, hence greater chance of them catching drivers, therefore generating more money! (i.e. less about actual road safety, more about money)
5) making illegal the use of detectors and alike when they would actually help the driver to slow down in due time rather than slam on the breaks like most people do when they see a camera van or traffic car or such, surely this is safer, but it wouldn't generate as much money, hence its illegal to use!
This is just some of it! No one is saying you should speed or break the law and if you do, yes its your own fault and you should accept it, however it does seem rather unfair when you compare the effort put in to enforce this compared to solving other real crimes or even say controlling the yob culture of our society where people are stabbing and shooting each other left, right & centre and nothing is being done because the givernment is too busy with the money it makes from the poor drivers who just happened to be going a bit faster than he should have!
Generally it's 70mph on a dual carriageway if there is a central reservation.Robert T wrote:Yeah, sorry Alfie, mate! I read your post a bit quickly. I was just trying to emphasise that not ALL dual carriageways are national speed limit.Alfie wrote:Robert T wrote: Only if signposted as National Speed Limit.
Erm, I think that's what I said, wasn't it?
Cheers R.
Mr Erdnase , sorry to hear you got caught and you are being very pragmactic about it.
There are quite a few views on this thread but "there for the grace of god" or some non religious equivalent is mine . We all at some time or other exceed the speed limit , we all know there are various methods of getting caught braking this particular law .
If you get caught deal with it like Erdnase, take on the chin .
Oh I would grab the 3 points myself before they change there mind .
There are quite a few views on this thread but "there for the grace of god" or some non religious equivalent is mine . We all at some time or other exceed the speed limit , we all know there are various methods of getting caught braking this particular law .
If you get caught deal with it like Erdnase, take on the chin .
Oh I would grab the 3 points myself before they change there mind .
I have been diagnosed with ADHOTS. Attention Deficit Hyperactive Ohh That's Shiney
- PhoenixCoupe
- Joined: Wed 02 May, 2007 00:46
- Posts: 739
- Location: Mars