O
oompah
So was it just the once he was there or every day at the same time?
speeding fine
- Thread starter joe-90
- Start date
- Status
Sponsored Links
yep no doubt you are right , in the good old days you were actually stopped by the police in-formed of your mis-demeanor , & discretion could be used now it is all cameras speed cameras CCTV ect , cameras do not always tell the complete story therfore the truth ?
- Joined
- 28 Oct 2005
- Messages
- 31,281
- Reaction score
- 1,997
- Country
She doesn't know as she never noticed him. Hopefully, either he wasn't there next day or she checked her speedo more closely.
Only if you're speeding!
Sponsored Links
O
oompah
Well if she's lucky (or unlucky depending on your point of view) she will only get the one ticket,out of interest do you get points on your licence for speeding offences and what impact on your insurance does it have.
Soon they will be a thing of the past, as there is no money in the kitty to maintain them and no money to install new ones and new reports prove they don't prevent accidents.
So get your points while you can
IRONY!!!
This is going to be delicious. Here goes...As someone whose "stupidity" was pointed out for wanting to do more than 70 on the motorway, in a post where you also stated "it might be my relative you kill", I find it ironic that your relative believes it is acceptable to drive at a frankly ridiculous, stupid, idiotic, moronic, criminally negligent speed past the houses of honest British people.
You then have the cheek to refer to an honest hardworking policeman doing his job as "a sad copper" and "sad plod". For a man who appeared to have such strong morals and values, I am shocked at this revelation that you see the police as the enemy, and that you must therefore support paedophiles, murderers, speeders and rapists too. Think of the children Joe, think of the children
As a law-abiding motorist it would seem I have more to fear of your relatives, than they do of me.
A sad day, indeed.
I'm full. That was very tasty, thank you.
IRONY!!!
As someone whose "stupidity" was pointed out for wanting to do more than 70 on the motorway, in a post where you also stated "it might be my relative you kill", I find it ironic that your relative believes it is acceptable to drive at a frankly ridiculous, stupid, idiotic, moronic, criminally negligent speed past the houses of honest British people.
You then have the cheek to refer to an honest hardworking policeman doing his job as "a sad copper" and "sad plod". For a man who appeared to have such strong morals and values, I am shocked at this revelation that you see the police as the enemy, and that you must therefore support paedophiles, murderers, speeders and rapists too. Think of the children Joe, think of the children
As a law-abiding motorist it would seem I have more to fear of your relatives, than they do of me.
A sad day, indeed.
I'm full. That was very tasty, thank you.
A dish best eaten cold
J
joinerjohn
I must admit there are roads where the speed limit is ridiculously slow. Here in Derby the main ring road has a 40mph limit, yet for most of it's length , it's a dual carriageway with central barriers, wide grass verges and railings up.
In another part of Derby, there's one section of road with 3 gatso's within a half mile stretch of the road (where there hasn't been a fatality within the past 20 +yrs)
I tend to agree with the posters who say speed cameras are nothing to do with road safety, rather they are a revenue raiser. It seems even the Con/ Lib coalition believe this to be true too.
In another part of Derby, there's one section of road with 3 gatso's within a half mile stretch of the road (where there hasn't been a fatality within the past 20 +yrs)
I tend to agree with the posters who say speed cameras are nothing to do with road safety, rather they are a revenue raiser. It seems even the Con/ Lib coalition believe this to be true too.
J
Johnmelad502
unusual username. Have only seen it used once before on the UK Geocaching site. ?
I'm 100% with you, I don't understand why motorists hate speed cameras, they might as well do away speed limit signs as well because the signs are pointless according to anti-speed camera. If the motorists are not happy with speed limits then write to your Mp's and tell them why. My road is 20mph and there're still idiots doing 35-40mph including going over the speed humps, the only way is speed cameras.
B
Big Tone
To the O/P
Try here and/or here Both are free to join.
Speed cameras measure speed, not safety! They don't measure alcohol, drugs, uninsured - they cannot tell if you have any tread on your tyres or whether you are distracted by the radio, air con or getting a B-Job.
A 30 limit is too fast when there are children and parked cars about on a rainy day and you have just downed a pint of Speckled Hen.
35mph, or more, can be safer in that same 30 limit when those circumstances are not present. ie. Sunny day, no parked cars, no people around and you haven't just guzzled a pint.
People I know who have had an impeccable accident-free driving record their entire life have been getting done these past few years. Insurance companies do not put your premium up for a speeding offence and who better knows about what and who is dangerous?
Since Swindon switched their cameras off a year ago the KSI rate has not increased – FACT!
There are two types of driver; those who admit to speeding and liars. (see my sig.). N.B. Speeding, by definition, is anything over a posted speed limit.
More honesty, less hypocrisy please…
Try here and/or here Both are free to join.
Speed cameras measure speed, not safety! They don't measure alcohol, drugs, uninsured - they cannot tell if you have any tread on your tyres or whether you are distracted by the radio, air con or getting a B-Job.
A 30 limit is too fast when there are children and parked cars about on a rainy day and you have just downed a pint of Speckled Hen.
35mph, or more, can be safer in that same 30 limit when those circumstances are not present. ie. Sunny day, no parked cars, no people around and you haven't just guzzled a pint.
People I know who have had an impeccable accident-free driving record their entire life have been getting done these past few years. Insurance companies do not put your premium up for a speeding offence and who better knows about what and who is dangerous?
Since Swindon switched their cameras off a year ago the KSI rate has not increased – FACT!
There are two types of driver; those who admit to speeding and liars. (see my sig.). N.B. Speeding, by definition, is anything over a posted speed limit.
More honesty, less hypocrisy please…
I fully understand what you're saying, some speed limits are out of date but it doesn't make it right to break the speed limit just because motorists think it's okay to do so otherwise it's waste of time having speed signs, where do you draw the line? Push it up from 30 to 40mph then most motorists will be doing 45-50mph !
Not sure now, I think the first speeding doesn't count depending which insurance companies but you have to tell them all points on your licence but the 2nd speeding may come into account pushing the premium up(?)
B
Big Tone
Hi masona
You’re right about the second time you get done but it only increases by something in the order of £20. I have proved this by going onto an online company, like eBike, and submitted my details with a, (pretend), speeding conviction, and then two such convictions. I tried it with something which is dangerous like overtaking on double white lines or going through a red light and my quote doubled!!!
Those drivers don’t need to be done for speeding; they need to be done for the much worse offence of Dangerous Driving or Driving without due care and Attention. They are both much worse offences than speeding and accurately describe what they are doing. The penalty is far worse too, so they will get stung far more in their pockets which you should be pleased about, I hope?
I assume you would not be pleased if you saw someone doing the 20 mph speed limit past a parked car where children are playing on a frosty winter’s day? It would be dangerous, to state the obvious, and at that point a walking pace would be safer until the danger has passed IMO; not something as quick as 20 mph.
It is this fixation on speed instead of what is actually safe which has duped a generation into believing that ‘so long as I am not speeding I am driving safely’ The fallacy of this indoctrination thanks to the ‘Speed Kills’ campaign has taught drivers nothing about a safe speed for the conditions sadly.
The whole issue of road safety can only be done using traffic police, something we used to have far more of before automation for the sake of cost saving and milking the motorist. The only way that could be sold to us is to lower speed limits and demonise speed with no thought or initiative towards education and training. So now it’s commonplace to see 40 limits where they have been 60 or NSL all my life with no history of an accident; the dumbing down of society so that we are all going slowly instead of weeding out the truly dangerous drivers.
It is irresponsible drivers like you have just described masona who are responsible for the erection of speed cameras which then get good, experienced drivers for driving at a safe speed for the conditions at a place and time where it is not dangerous. A safe experienced driver would never do what you have described down your road, I certainly wouldn’t, and it is these despicable fools who are ruining it for everyone else and end up killing someone. Would you not instead prefer a policeman to pull him over and issue him with a ticket, perhaps a threat to impound his car, maybe charge him for reckless driving? Or do you really instead prefer a speed camera which will not arrest the abhorrent behaviour before or after that camera location and allow that fool to carry on driving dangerously?
As speed cameras are going to be switched off it is absolutely imperative that more traffic police are deployed. Their visibility not only acts as a deterrent but, as I have said, they are in a position to catch the whole gamut of infractions which speed cameras never have and never will detect.
Take care and thanks
Tony
You’re right about the second time you get done but it only increases by something in the order of £20. I have proved this by going onto an online company, like eBike, and submitted my details with a, (pretend), speeding conviction, and then two such convictions. I tried it with something which is dangerous like overtaking on double white lines or going through a red light and my quote doubled!!!
I disagree, but please hear me out...
Those drivers don’t need to be done for speeding; they need to be done for the much worse offence of Dangerous Driving or Driving without due care and Attention. They are both much worse offences than speeding and accurately describe what they are doing. The penalty is far worse too, so they will get stung far more in their pockets which you should be pleased about, I hope?
I assume you would not be pleased if you saw someone doing the 20 mph speed limit past a parked car where children are playing on a frosty winter’s day? It would be dangerous, to state the obvious, and at that point a walking pace would be safer until the danger has passed IMO; not something as quick as 20 mph.
It is this fixation on speed instead of what is actually safe which has duped a generation into believing that ‘so long as I am not speeding I am driving safely’ The fallacy of this indoctrination thanks to the ‘Speed Kills’ campaign has taught drivers nothing about a safe speed for the conditions sadly.
The whole issue of road safety can only be done using traffic police, something we used to have far more of before automation for the sake of cost saving and milking the motorist. The only way that could be sold to us is to lower speed limits and demonise speed with no thought or initiative towards education and training. So now it’s commonplace to see 40 limits where they have been 60 or NSL all my life with no history of an accident; the dumbing down of society so that we are all going slowly instead of weeding out the truly dangerous drivers.
It is irresponsible drivers like you have just described masona who are responsible for the erection of speed cameras which then get good, experienced drivers for driving at a safe speed for the conditions at a place and time where it is not dangerous. A safe experienced driver would never do what you have described down your road, I certainly wouldn’t, and it is these despicable fools who are ruining it for everyone else and end up killing someone. Would you not instead prefer a policeman to pull him over and issue him with a ticket, perhaps a threat to impound his car, maybe charge him for reckless driving? Or do you really instead prefer a speed camera which will not arrest the abhorrent behaviour before or after that camera location and allow that fool to carry on driving dangerously?
As speed cameras are going to be switched off it is absolutely imperative that more traffic police are deployed. Their visibility not only acts as a deterrent but, as I have said, they are in a position to catch the whole gamut of infractions which speed cameras never have and never will detect.
Take care and thanks
Tony
- Status
Sponsored Links
