Avoid points on a driving licence

Now, lets put this in perspective, because as it so happens, In another incarnation I give legal advice to people for alleged speeding offences.

First of all, lets demolish the myth that the speeding laws are about road safety. This is merely the excuse used to justify the entire legislation. Speed Cameras are a money making scheme, and nothing else, and as such, bring road safety into disrepute and undermine the whole concept.

For a start, even by the governments own figures, excessive speed was only a contributing factor in 16% of all accidents. By far and away the biggest factor was driver error. SO we would be better training driver rather than ploughing money into speed traps, except of course, the government makes £400M a year from them.

Then you have the extraordinary lengths the government has gone to to keep the money machine rolling consider the following:

1. The government is reducing legal aid for people specifically accused under the Road Traffic Act to discourage people from challenging tickets in court. They want people just to roll over and take the 3 points and £60 without a fight, so by removing legal aid you either admit guilt when you may well be innocent, of shell out £2k - £4k to prove your innocent. That is outrageous!!

2. The S.172 notice is the only legislation that FORCES you to incriminate yourself whilst NOT UNDER CAUTION. It makes you admit you were driving under threat of 6 points and £1000 fine. Furthermore, since it is effectively a FORCED confession, its shouldnt be admissible because when you fill one in, you have not been cautioned under PACE. This has been argued in the European Court, but they refused to support the point because it woudl have meant refunding Billions of pounds in fines since 1982 and paying compensation the thousands of motorists who lost there jobs because of points awarded. It violates your human rights of protection from self incrimination.

And dont think the Police play fair here, either. Ive seen dozens and dozens of cases where the police simply lie, fabricate evidence, lose evidence, and even illegally back date papers or collude with other officers to ensure the false accusations stick. We have seen multiple cases which have been withdrawn when they are challenged because of flaws in the operation of the equipment, flaws in the evidence, and flaws in the statements and the police do not want the shortcomings of the system exposed. Make no mistake, any lie is ok as long as it keeps the money machine rolling. Any deception is ok, and its wrong , because the law should apply equally to us and the police, and it doesnt, the police see ignoring the law as a perk of the job

Believe me, when you have seen as many cases as I have, you know its a money scam. If it is road safety, why are more than 20% of cameras placed on long straight roads where there has been no accidents for 3 years? - because they know people will speed on long straights!! Weve seen people prosecuted for doing 85 on a deserted motorway at 4 AM with no other vehicle for miles - what the hell has that got to do with road safety???

The law is so flawed that in fact the ONLY evidence to convict you of speeding is a copper stops you and says '"I have formed the opinion you were speeding",. and a second copper says "i agree, i also have formed the opinion you were speeding". And they have even tried that one, if they need some convictions for the targets, they can pick on YOU no matter how law abiding you are, its nothing to do with if you actually were speeding!! And if you think the police dont ever lie, I suggest you go and have a chat with the Menedez family.

Nope sorry, its a scam, and a very large one, and it sucks in perfectly law abiding people and needlessly criminalises the population.
 
Sponsored Links
Selections from http://wapedia.mobi/en/Speedometer?t=4.

12 Mar 2001 : Column WA59 Lords: Hansard: Written Answers.
Speedometer Accuracy

Lord Allen of Abbeydale asked Her Majesty's Government:

Whether, in the light of the increasing importance of speed limits, they have any plans to make it easier for the private motorist to have his speedometer tested for accuracy.[HL839]

Lord Whitty: The Road Vehicles (Construction and Use) Regulations 1986, as amended, allows the use of speedometers that meet the requirements of EC Community Directive 75/443(97/39) or ECE Regulation 39. Both the EC Directive and the ECE Regulation lay down accuracy requirements to be applied at the time of vehicle approval for speedometers. These requirements are that the indicated speed must not be more than 10 per cent of the true speed plus 4 km/h. In production, however, a slightly different tolerance of 5 per cent plus 10 km/h is applied. The requirements are also that the indicated speed must never be less than the true speed.

A vehicle meeting these requirements would not be able to travel at a greater speed than that shown on the speedometer and a driver could not, therefore, inadvertently exceed speed restrictions. Her Majesty's Government have no plans to introduce instrument tests.

-------------------------------------------------

Statutory Instrument 2001 No. 25
The Motor Vehicles (Approval) Regulations 2001
...
Schedules
...
3. Approval requirements for relevant vehicles
...
Regulation 5(1)(a)
...
(19)
1. The vehicle shall be fitted with a speedometer capable of indicating speed in mph at uniform intervals not exceeding 20 mph at all speeds up to the maximum speed of the vehicle and capable of being read by the driver at all times of the day or night.

2. For all true speeds up to the design speed of the vehicle, the true speed shall not exceed the indicated speed.

3. For all true speeds of between 25 mph and 70 mph (or the maximum speed if lower), the difference between the indicated speed and the true speed shall not exceed -

V/10 + 6.25 mph

where V = the true speed of the vehicle in mph.
83.25mph at true 70mph is top build limit then...


The amended Road Vehicles (Construction and Use) Regulations 1986 permits the use of speedometers that meet either the requirements of EC Council Directive 75/443 (as amended by Directive 97/39) or UNECE Regulation 39.

-0-
 
Now, lets put this in perspective, because as it so happens, In another incarnation I give legal advice to people blah blah ad nauseam
Deal LB - I'd be interested to know what you consider as unacceptable speeding or are all speed limits merely contrived to 'violate your human rights'?
 
Sponsored Links
It violates your human rights of protection from self incrimination.
Stuff the human rights act - if the EDP get their way it'll be repealed in this country within the year and replaced with a bill of rights. They should have called it the criminal rights act - as far as Im concerned when a criminal sets out to commit a crime, they leave their human rights at home.


I know how to avoid points on your driving license.


Dont speed.


This thread contains nothing useful and should be locked. :evil:

Oh shut up you miserable crunt :D
:evil: :evil: :evil: :evil: :evil:
 
Now, lets put this in perspective, because as it so happens, In another incarnation I give legal advice to people blah blah ad nauseam
Deal LB - I'd be interested to know what you consider as unacceptable speeding or are all speed limits merely contrived to 'violate your human rights'?

Well you didnt read my post did you...........so tell me why i shoudl repeat my position.

I support road safety. Speeding is not the major cause of road accident, even the government agrees. Therefore we should concentrate on the area that does cause most accidents, as that will have the greatest cost benefit, which is retraining drivers.

ofc the government wont do that, as it will cost them money. There just easy to let people break the law and then pay money instead, which achieves nothing

Tell me. do speed cameras catch uninsured drivers? drunk driver? drugged drivers? drivers with no licenses? do they stop stolen vehicles? unsafe vehicles? Joyriders?

no, they dont do any of that, they just make money for the government. Road Safety isnt on the agenda, they just pretend it is.

Now make a sensible reply, if you can cmother1, if you think my arguments are wrong. If you have nothing useful to contribute, i suggest you STFU otherwise you'll give away the fact your a brainless tool........ just remember, when they walk over my human rights, there walking over yours as well, and you might need yours one day, when your wrongly stitched up for speeding, or some far more serious crime. Unless ofc you think its ok for the police to stitch up and convict innocent people. Ask Charles De Menedez's family..............of go and look here........

http://www.innocent.org.uk/

and hope you never have to feature on it.
 
To be honest Lincs, I thought you were making a well informed and passionate argument until you said this:

If you have nothing useful to contribute, i suggest you STFU otherwise you'll give away the fact your a brainless tool........

Think you owe cmother an apology. :confused: Then go back and delete this section of your post and I'll do the same subsequently from this one
 
I know how to avoid points on your driving license.


Dont speed.


This thread contains nothing useful and should be locked. :evil:

People still get points and fines for speeding when they wernt doing so, stitched up by the police, i suggest you go to www.pepipoo.com and read some of the cases there, all real.

Your attitude is naive, simplistic and childish, and ignores the facts.
 
Your attitude is naive, simplistic and childish, and ignores the facts

and your attitude is?

Your attitude is naive, simplistic and childish, and ignores the facts.
Your attitude is becoming self evident :confused:


Well done, you both managed to miss the point entirely.


Ive posted my view, with reasons, and made my position totally clear. Neither of you two managed to raise a single useful counter argument or disproof, raise any points, or produce a single argument. Why do you both engage in debate if you cant argue a point of view, and just post meaningless rubbish ?

The prosecution rests.
 
Well done, you both managed to miss the point entirely.
no, you useless lump of horse tur d, we have missed no point. I have read your epistolet on the "real" reasons behind speeding fines and by and large agree with it. I notice how your head is so far up your paranoia ar se that you fail to understand why this money is raised and what it is used for. I guess that you're too thick to comprehend the need for this money.

You inform us that a small percentage of deaths were caused by speed related accidents - presumably these lives were not worth saving then, as they infringe on your paltry human rights. :rolleyes:

Ive posted my view, with reasons, and made my position totally clear. Neither of you two managed to raise a single useful counter argument or disproof, raise any points, or produce a single argument. Why do you both engage in debate if you cant argue a point of view, and just post meaningless rubbish ?The prosecution rests.
The point is, dimwit, that if you are indeed as clever as you wish to make out, then the use of insults as a way of strengthening your arguments does in fact reduce it. You are looking and sounding like some half witted crossbreed whose abusive tones indicate that you aren't the professional that you'd presumably like us to think you are.

Ar se head :LOL: :LOL:
 
having read all the above and taken in what has been said everyone has their own opinion on this subject and i agree that in most cases the punishment doesn't meet the crime
why should a motorist "speeding" at 2 - 3 mph over the set limit get a fine/points to the same degree as someone 20 mph above the limit. the 1st could be treated say 1 point+ £30 and the 2nd at 20 mph over get a fine of say 4 points+ £100.
why doesn't this happen because as lincs correctly says they make more money out of the 1st than they do the 2nd!!

as i said earlier i inadvertantly exceeded a speed limit the other day, i wasn't in a rush, i wasn't deliberately exceeding the limit. no i was just pootling along a DUAL Carriageway that the powers that be have decided to make 30MPH (the only dual carriageway in Southampton that is 30MPH to my knowledge other than in the town centre) there are no signs other than 1 6"x 6" camera sign (no speed indicator on it) for over 1/4 of a mile (i checked on google street view afterwards) if it was about safety then there would be at least 1 sign on each side and would have a speed written underneath but no that won't make any money will it!!.
 
as i said earlier i inadvertantly exceeded a speed limit the other day, i wasn't in a rush, i wasn't deliberately exceeding the limit. no i was just pootling along a DUAL Carriageway that the powers that be have decided to make 30MPH there are no signs other than 1 6"x 6" camera sign (no speed indicator on it) for over 1/4 of a mile (i checked on google street view afterwards) if it was about safety then there would be at least 1 sign on each side and would have a speed written underneath but no that won't make any money will it!!.
You may appeal against this. Think it's in the statute books that speed limits need to be provided at a given distance apart. There were cases a few years back along the A1 north of Newcaslte-upon-tyne which highlighted this fact and those fined had to be given their money back and points knocked off. Maybe worth a bit of research.
 
Sponsored Links
Back
Top