I don't think less people are being killed on Britains roads as a result of more drivers having their licences endorsed.
It just breeds resentment. I'm all for dangerous drivers being taken off the road for the safety of others but penalising drivers for creeping over speed limits by small amounts is unecessary. If a police officer stops you they rarely give out speeding tickets but prefer firm bollockings which in my experiance (watching, not recieving said bollockings) they do a lot more than a £60 fine and 3 points.
i must admit it always suprises me when i see people defend the speeding limits, and the questionable methods to catch people speeding.
There is a massive, massive difference between people driving above legal limits and people driving without undue care and attention. Driving with music blaring out at nightclub levels, fiddling with your radio, smoking, turning around to chat to people in the back, checking out a bit of skirt walking along the pavement, driving bumper to bumper, are all much more dangerous than someone driving at 35mph down an open road, or say 85mph on a deserted motorway at night.
Car technology and in particular breaking system have moved on considerably from when the speeding laws were introduced, and this doesn't seem to have been reflected. Nor does the fact that a lot of speed cameras have been alloted to areas that are not danger hotspots, but cleverly placed at the bottom of hills to pick up those that have drifted a few mph higher.
The police do seem to process driving claims with alarmingly more efficiency than domestic crimes such as burglary, and that to me is wrong.
[cite]Posted By: AFKA Bartram[/cite]i must admit it always suprises me when i see people defend the speeding limits, and the questionable methods to catch people speeding.
There is a massive, massive difference between people driving above legal limits and people driving without undue care and attention. Driving with music blaring out at nightclub levels, fiddling with your radio, smoking, turning around to chat to people in the back, checking out a bit of skirt walking along the pavement, driving bumper to bumper, are all much more dangerous than someone driving at 35mph down an open road, or say 85mph on a deserted motorway at night.
Car technology and in particular breaking system have moved on considerably from when the speeding laws were introduced, and this doesn't seem to have been reflected. Nor does the fact that a lot of speed cameras have been alloted to areas that are not danger hotspots, but cleverly placed at the bottom of hills to pick up those that have drifted a few mph higher.
The police do seem to process driving claims with alarmingly more efficiency than domestic crimes such as burglary, and that to me is wrong.
agree, but speeding whether by 6mph or 30 mph is essentially wrong. and why people are trying to justify its not important is ridiculous. its wrong!
yes, there is a scale of importance that isn't sorted out, there is a structure in place that is perhaps not the best, but rules are rules and why shouldn't they be adheared to? no matter how 'silly' it seems to people.
[cite]Posted By: Medders[/cite]Autobahn's in Germany have no speed limits.
Question - do they have a higher accident rate than us on those roads compared to our motorways?
Think there about the same, but the difference is the Germans drive properly on their motorways, lane discipline is brutally inforced by the Police let alone other drivers, and some parts of the Autobahn have speed limits on them
[cite]Posted By: AFKA Bartram[/cite]The police do seem to process driving claims with alarmingly more efficiency than domestic crimes such as burglary, and that to me is wrong.
However, ring them up and tell them you've caught the burgular red handed, and he's now lying on your kitchen floor unconscious after a good shoeing, and the OB will be there in a flash... where you'll promptly be arrested for GBH!
[cite]Posted By: AFKA Bartram[/cite]The police do seem to process driving claims with alarmingly more efficiency than domestic crimes such as burglary, and that to me is wrong.
However, ring them up and tell them you've caught the burgular red handed, and he's now lying on your kitchen floor unconscious after a good shoeing, and the OB will be there in a flash... where you'll promptly be arrested for GBH!
I sincerely doubt that a bollocking would have a bigger effect on drivers mindset, than a kick in their wallet.
My only comment on the 'creeping over the speed limit' thing, is that as far as some police are concerned, I would suspect that they view drivers who creep over, as likely to go considerably faster at other times. The view would be, that if you are likely to break the law by small amounts, the longer you get away with it, the more likely you are to comit worse offenses.
How much more resentment would there be for a family who lost a loved one as a result of a speeding car, only to find out that the driver had been let off for speeding earlier, becasue it wasn't deemed dangerous enough?
[cite]Posted By: AFKA Bartram[/cite]The police do seem to process driving claims with alarmingly more efficiency than domestic crimes such as burglary, and that to me is wrong.
However, ring them up and tell them you've caught the burgular red handed, and he's now lying on your kitchen floor unconscious after a good shoeing, and the OB will be there in a flash... where you'll promptly be arrested for GBH!
;-)
No you wouldn't
I bet you would!
Bit of a different topic, but we've had issues with kids coming over our fence and into our garden. We've been looking into putting up barbed wire etc, and have found out that the law says that we're responsible for any injuries caused to persons entering our garden, even if they're uninvited. How does that make sense?
[cite]Posted By: AFKA Bartram[/cite]The police do seem to process driving claims with alarmingly more efficiency than domestic crimes such as burglary, and that to me is wrong.
However, ring them up and tell them you've caught the burgular red handed, and he's now lying on your kitchen floor unconscious after a good shoeing, and the OB will be there in a flash... where you'll promptly be arrested for GBH!
;-)
No you wouldn't
Maybe not GBH but you would be arrested and held, or if the burglar is stupid enough to climb in through a top window of a bay and the dog tries to tear his face off the dog is taken away and destroyed, and the owner prosecuted. And this has happened to someone I know well, it's not a made up sensationalised story. I'll point out that my mate had a bloody great big sign on the gate of his house and the front door that there was a dog in the house and to beware.
There is a massive, massive difference between people driving above legal limits and people driving without undue care and attention.
One equates to the other in my opinion and if it doesn't, then you must be driving above the legal limit deliberately. Which means you most certainly are driving without any consideration to other road users or pedestrians and deserve any punishment that gets handed out.
There is a massive, massive difference between people driving above legal limits and people driving without undue care and attention.[/quote]
One equates to the other in my opinion and if it doesn't, then you must be driving above the legal limit deliberately. Which means you most certainly are driving without any consideration to other road users or pedestrians and deserve any punishment that gets handed out.[/quote]
Spot on KB. As Dylan sang "to live outside the law you must be honest"
This driver knows the mirror signal manoeuvre rule, and is also a very considerate driver. I do feel somewhat aggrieved to be put in the same bracket as a dangerous driver, I have never had an accident that was my fault (others driving into me is not of my doing) and have never driven intentionally over the speed limit. I get incensed by people tearing around (as I said earlier) by schools and residential/built up areas. Yet do not see the same prevention measures applied as is on more open busy roads.
Rothko, fair play if you have seen drivers caught but I haven't and would dearly like to see more of it where it would educate more of the morons who treat a 2.5 metre wide road like a drag track.
[cite]Posted By: MCS[/cite]Cor i have opened up a can of worms here aint i! 78 posts on this subject since i last logged on, cant believe that!
Yep, possibly my fault, sorry.
It's a bit of an itchy subject with me I'm afraid. Coming up to the sixth anniversary of being hit by a speeding car in an accident that nearly killed me. Apologies to all if I've been a bit overbearing on the matter.
[cite]Posted By: Rothko[/cite]I'm just a bit narked with some of the arseholes driving cars this morning on the ride in.
Understandable. I'm working in Bishopsgate this week, and it's a fooking dangerous place compared to the Wharf... cyclists everywhere, motorbikes, pedestrians walking into all of the above...
I've done all, been a pedestrian, cyclist, motorcyclist and car driver, so think I have a good understanding to each... I think everyone should be made to do all of them in London so they have a great respect for the other....
[cite]Posted By: Stu of SE7[/cite]In my experience cyclists break far more traffic laws than car drivers, then again, that's an entirely different topic.
[cite]Posted By: AFKA Bartram[/cite]The police do seem to process driving claims with alarmingly more efficiency than domestic crimes such as burglary, and that to me is wrong.
However, ring them up and tell them you've caught the burgular red handed, and he's now lying on your kitchen floor unconscious after a good shoeing, and the OB will be there in a flash... where you'll promptly be arrested for GBH!
;-)
No you wouldn't
I bet you would!
Bit of a different topic, but we've had issues with kids coming over our fence and into our garden. We've been looking into putting up barbed wire etc, and have found out that the law says that we're responsible for any injuries caused to persons entering our garden, even if they're uninvited. How does that make sense?
what if you fire pellets at them as they're mid fence hop?
is it your fence or your neighbours? have you told the parents responsible?
You think the kids will tell us who their parents are?!
It's a fence between our garden, and woodland to the side of us.
[cite]Posted By: Stu of SE7[/cite]In my experience cyclists break far more traffic laws than car drivers, then again, that's an entirely different topic.
[cite]Posted By: Stu of SE7[/cite]In my experience cyclists break far more traffic laws than car drivers, then again, that's an entirely different topic.
Bollocks
I've never seen a driver jump a red light, I see at least 5 cyclists a day do it, I almost got hit by one this morning, hey yelled out 'what where your going mate' leaving me totally stunned, red means stop, not just for cars.
[cite]Posted By: Stu of SE7[/cite]In my experience cyclists break far more traffic laws than car drivers, then again, that's an entirely different topic.
Bollocks
I've never seen a driver jump a red light, I see at least 5 cyclists a day do it, I almost got hit by one this morning, hey yelled out 'what where your going mate' leaving me totally stunned, red means stop, not just for cars.
Car drivers jump reds all the time, especially when they're trying to get through a changing yellow.
Some cyclist do it, but not as many as people make out, and if it weren't for car and van drivers stopping in the bike section at the front of junctions, even less would.
[cite]Posted By: AFKA Bartram[/cite]The police do seem to process driving claims with alarmingly more efficiency than domestic crimes such as burglary, and that to me is wrong.
However, ring them up and tell them you've caught the burgular red handed, and he's now lying on your kitchen floor unconscious after a good shoeing, and the OB will be there in a flash... where you'll promptly be arrested for GBH!
;-)
No you wouldn't
I bet you would!
Bit of a different topic, but we've had issues with kids coming over our fence and into our garden. We've been looking into putting up barbed wire etc, and have found out that the law says that we're responsible for any injuries caused to persons entering our garden, even if they're uninvited. How does that make sense?
Spooky. Just been talking to my next door neighbour who has just got off the phone to the police (again). Last month they had their fence panels kicked in by youths and have now had the panels kicked in, them in their garden and smashing the greenhouse panels SEVEN times in the past five weeks.
Police got no interest whatsoever. But as some say on here, the youths aren't killing anyone like the motorist driving at 80mph on a motorway. This is just a pensioner, in his late 70s suffering from a very serious illness and now frightened to leave his house and living in fear.
Some cyclist do it, but not as many as people make out, and if it weren't for car and van drivers stopping in the bike section at the front of junctions, even less would.
If a light is red there is a good chance people will be trying to cross the road, trying to justify it by saying cars are in the way is pretty silly.
Squeezing through a yellow is wrong I agree, but blatantly jumping a red is far far worse.
Comments
It just breeds resentment. I'm all for dangerous drivers being taken off the road for the safety of others but penalising drivers for creeping over speed limits by small amounts is unecessary. If a police officer stops you they rarely give out speeding tickets but prefer firm bollockings which in my experiance (watching, not recieving said bollockings) they do a lot more than a £60 fine and 3 points.
There is a massive, massive difference between people driving above legal limits and people driving without undue care and attention. Driving with music blaring out at nightclub levels, fiddling with your radio, smoking, turning around to chat to people in the back, checking out a bit of skirt walking along the pavement, driving bumper to bumper, are all much more dangerous than someone driving at 35mph down an open road, or say 85mph on a deserted motorway at night.
Car technology and in particular breaking system have moved on considerably from when the speeding laws were introduced, and this doesn't seem to have been reflected. Nor does the fact that a lot of speed cameras have been alloted to areas that are not danger hotspots, but cleverly placed at the bottom of hills to pick up those that have drifted a few mph higher.
The police do seem to process driving claims with alarmingly more efficiency than domestic crimes such as burglary, and that to me is wrong.
Maybe cause driving offences tend to kill people
Question - do they have a higher accident rate than us on those roads compared to our motorways?
agree, but speeding whether by 6mph or 30 mph is essentially wrong. and why people are trying to justify its not important is ridiculous. its wrong!
yes, there is a scale of importance that isn't sorted out, there is a structure in place that is perhaps not the best, but rules are rules and why shouldn't they be adheared to? no matter how 'silly' it seems to people.
Think there about the same, but the difference is the Germans drive properly on their motorways, lane discipline is brutally inforced by the Police let alone other drivers, and some parts of the Autobahn have speed limits on them
However, ring them up and tell them you've caught the burgular red handed, and he's now lying on your kitchen floor unconscious after a good shoeing, and the OB will be there in a flash... where you'll promptly be arrested for GBH!
;-)
No you wouldn't
My only comment on the 'creeping over the speed limit' thing, is that as far as some police are concerned, I would suspect that they view drivers who creep over, as likely to go considerably faster at other times. The view would be, that if you are likely to break the law by small amounts, the longer you get away with it, the more likely you are to comit worse offenses.
How much more resentment would there be for a family who lost a loved one as a result of a speeding car, only to find out that the driver had been let off for speeding earlier, becasue it wasn't deemed dangerous enough?
I bet you would!
Bit of a different topic, but we've had issues with kids coming over our fence and into our garden. We've been looking into putting up barbed wire etc, and have found out that the law says that we're responsible for any injuries caused to persons entering our garden, even if they're uninvited. How does that make sense?
is it your fence or your neighbours? have you told the parents responsible?
Maybe not GBH but you would be arrested and held, or if the burglar is stupid enough to climb in through a top window of a bay and the dog tries to tear his face off the dog is taken away and destroyed, and the owner prosecuted. And this has happened to someone I know well, it's not a made up sensationalised story. I'll point out that my mate had a bloody great big sign on the gate of his house and the front door that there was a dog in the house and to beware.
One equates to the other in my opinion and if it doesn't, then you must be driving above the legal limit deliberately. Which means you most certainly are driving without any consideration to other road users or pedestrians and deserve any punishment that gets handed out.
There is a massive, massive difference between people driving above legal limits and people driving without undue care and attention.[/quote]
One equates to the other in my opinion and if it doesn't, then you must be driving above the legal limit deliberately. Which means you most certainly are driving without any consideration to other road users or pedestrians and deserve any punishment that gets handed out.[/quote]
Spot on KB. As Dylan sang "to live outside the law you must be honest"
Rothko, fair play if you have seen drivers caught but I haven't and would dearly like to see more of it where it would educate more of the morons who treat a 2.5 metre wide road like a drag track.
Yep, possibly my fault, sorry.
It's a bit of an itchy subject with me I'm afraid. Coming up to the sixth anniversary of being hit by a speeding car in an accident that nearly killed me. Apologies to all if I've been a bit overbearing on the matter.
Understandable. I'm working in Bishopsgate this week, and it's a fooking dangerous place compared to the Wharf... cyclists everywhere, motorbikes, pedestrians walking into all of the above...
I've done all, been a pedestrian, cyclist, motorcyclist and car driver, so think I have a good understanding to each... I think everyone should be made to do all of them in London so they have a great respect for the other....
can of worms number 2 methinks!
You think the kids will tell us who their parents are?!
It's a fence between our garden, and woodland to the side of us.
Bollocks
I've never seen a driver jump a red light, I see at least 5 cyclists a day do it, I almost got hit by one this morning, hey yelled out 'what where your going mate' leaving me totally stunned, red means stop, not just for cars.
Car drivers jump reds all the time, especially when they're trying to get through a changing yellow.
Some cyclist do it, but not as many as people make out, and if it weren't for car and van drivers stopping in the bike section at the front of junctions, even less would.
Spooky. Just been talking to my next door neighbour who has just got off the phone to the police (again). Last month they had their fence panels kicked in by youths and have now had the panels kicked in, them in their garden and smashing the greenhouse panels SEVEN times in the past five weeks.
Police got no interest whatsoever. But as some say on here, the youths aren't killing anyone like the motorist driving at 80mph on a motorway. This is just a pensioner, in his late 70s suffering from a very serious illness and now frightened to leave his house and living in fear.
If a light is red there is a good chance people will be trying to cross the road, trying to justify it by saying cars are in the way is pretty silly.
Squeezing through a yellow is wrong I agree, but blatantly jumping a red is far far worse.