Fookin Rozzers - VERDICT ADDED

Thanks all for your support.

I would like to contribute to this discussion, but feel I am ill experienced to do so. :neutral_face: :wink: :slight_smile: :frowning: :blush: :eh:

There is no debate.

Arbitrary speed limits are a completely stupid idea that strip away any trust in any driver to make a sensible judgement as to the most suitable speed under varying traffic conditions. 20mph past the school at drop-off or pick-up time is entirely sensible; 40 mph may be perfectly acceptable at midnight. 30mph in town is probably a god idea during the day when it is full of shoppers but, at night there is no need. If it snows, 5 or 10 mph would be more sensible.

Arbitrary speed limits are the product of lazy law makers that have left 8 million perfectly normal law abiding citizens with a criminal record.

Most coppers aren’t intelligent enough to make a case for excessive speed without the support of arbitrary limits. That is why we have them so that there can be no argument in court - hence most don’t take it there but take the points and the fine on the spot. If our traffic police were given the responsibiloity for stopping and prosecuting motorists because what they did was dangerous (and not measured against arbitrary limits or descriptions with pre-set offence codes) most of them would get our support for preventing idiots from doing what they want on the roads. ‘Dangerous Driving’ or even ‘Driving without due care and attention’ do not need arbitrary limits or descriptions, only sensible application of common sense by someone in authority.

The simple truth is that that some people drive better than others and therefore all have diferent limits in any road situation. The last time I was done the copper couldn’t even find the code he needed for the offence he reckoned I had committed. My actions were not dangerous to me or any other road user but, becuase I failed to make my side of the road after an overtake before the continuous whitr line started I am now a criminal. As I explained to the fool at the time - had I known that he was in an unmarked police car, or had there been any sign of opposing traffic then I WOULD have made my side of the road befoe the continuous white line started.

The law is an ass. :frowning:

Top posting Mike :angel:

The police are no longer allowed to deal with a speeding offence ‘on the spot’. You get a verbal caution, and he/she fills out a piece of paper but you are not given a copy (i had my license with me at the time).

Apparently all ‘offences’ are notified by post whether it’s to attend a driver awareness course, points, or worse.

Here’s a copy of my letter to the court:-

I, the undersigned, confirm that I plead guilty to the offence identified by the above noted case, and as noted on the enclosed plea form and associated documents.
Please find enclosed;
• A letter containing my statement detailing the events of the above, together with some ‘matters for consideration’ (3 pages total)
• A letter from my employer.
I respectfully request that you take into account the above in determining how you decide to act.

Yours sincerely

Speeding Wed 4th September 2013, my statement of the events -
• I approached the A7 Stanwix Bank from Brampton road. There was a (Ford Focus) vehicle in the right hand (RH) lane of the two lanes in the approach to the A7.
• I approached the junction and remained in the left hand (LH) lane. The Traffic lights were Red.
• I Knew that I would need to be in the RH of the three lanes approaching the next roundabout, as I would be heading west through Carlisle, toward Whitehaven.
• I chose to accelerate from the junction ahead of the Focus for a safe distance to then manoeuvre across from the LH lane to the RH lane for the correct approach at the roundabout.
• In doing so I exceeded to 30mph limit briefly, solely to complete the manoeuvre safely and without hazard to the other vehicle, in the knowledge that the road was otherwise very quiet without any other vehicles or pedestrians present.
• On exiting the roundabout along the A595 there were road works reducing the two lanes to one. On entering the road works I checked my mirrors and saw a police car behind. I checked my speed which was just below 30mph.
• I was followed for approx. 1.5 to 2 miles along the A595 during which I never exceeded 30mph, this being the limit on the road.
• The police then indicated me to stop/pull over.
• I was informed by one of the officers the radar trap was on the A7 Stanwix Bank between the junction I joined at, and the major roundabout.
• On asking the officer why I had been followed for so long he advised that they were looking for a safe place to pull me over.

Matters that I wish the magistrates to consider -

  1. I confirm my guilty plea.
  2. The radar gave an instantaneous record of my speed on the A7 approach to the roundabout. This was during my executing a safe manoeuvre in order to correctly position my car for the approaching roundabout, without causing any distraction/hazard to the other vehicle.
  3. On completing the manoeuvre my speed returned to 30mph and never exceeded that up to the point I was stopped approximately 1.5 to 2 miles later.
  4. I cover some 30,000 miles per annum and have done so for each of the previous 5-6 years. I have had no accidents in the previous 20 years, during which I have covered in excess of some 500,000 (five hundred thousand) miles.
  5. I have a 3 point offence (speeding) on my license, dating from spring 2012 (documents enclosed).
  6. On the day of the alleged offence I was returning home from a track day - something that I attend several times per year. Track days allow me to explore my cars capabilities in a safe controlled environment, such that my interest in performance vehicles is not in conflict with safe road driving. It also improves my car control skills and general awareness, which are 2no transferrable skills to ensure safe and compliant driving on the highway.
  7. I have no interest in driving discourteously or in a manner not appropriate as a safe road user. My vehicle attracts enough undesirable attention as is!
  8. I recognise I briefly exceeded the prescribed limit on this occasion and ask that the above is taken in consideration in your decision to award any penalty you see fit.


good luck, really could land either side of the net

I genuinely hope that they take it into consideration.

With the arbitrary limits question, it seems to work for 99% of the world, what do you suggest? Leave it to the discretion of every officer? But then it leaves it open to the attitude test and all sorts of stuff.

Where do you stand on drink driving? Arbitrary limit? Or leave it to judgement. Suddenly each officer has to be trained in how to judge and then justify in court why in there opinion someone is too drunk to drive. Multiply that by every arbitrary limit you have removed and we’ll have a shit load more police. Catching even more people doing things they shouldn’t be.

Why do you think it’s so difficult to stop the mlm problem we have? There’s no definition of what’s acceptable or not, so you end up with nothing being done except some political soundbites about it being top priority.

Thanks. Their current performance does indicate otherwise sadly.

I’m getting legal advice on this, even if it only serves to see the magistrates squirm with embarrasment :shifty:

I think that, even for drink driving, there is a better system than an arbitrary alcohol measurement. It’s a simple truth that some people can’t drive properly when thay are sober and that many who have a few drinks will still be able to drive better than some of the no-hopers that get a driving licence. The US tests of inebriation would sem to be a better measure than an arbitrary limit.

The other thing is that, even though there may be nothing wrong with someone’s driving, they might , perhaps, be stopped for a dodgy rear lamp, found to be over the limit and then face a ban even though they were driving perfectly well. Whilst there is clearly a link being drunkenness and an in bility to drive properly, the crossover is NOT arbitrary in terms of alcohol consumed or in the bloodstream. I don’t have the answewr but there must be a better way of ‘judging’ performance.

I was delighted to hear of the recent introduction of stopping powers for ‘inconsiderate’ driving - middle lane hoggers etc (or MORON s as I call them - Middle Of the Road Or Nothing). These people are oftem much more dangerous than the enthusiastic and capbable driver who has had a couple of pints or drives abit quicker than average, in my opinion.

All that said, I am NOT an advocate of drink driving, nor would I do it or protect anyone who did, but I do believe that not everyone who might fail the arbitrary test has crossed into being a bad driver. I object to the evangeleistic pursuit of those who drive a bit faster than others or who might like a pint on the way home. We should have specially trained police officers who recognise BAD driving and who should be allowed to bring their cass to court and for a proper judgement on whether the accused was really a danger to others or simply broke some meaningless arbitrary code.

Outspoken? Yes, probably, but not a knee jerk reaction to this thread or any other catalyst. I’ve been of the road for over 40 yaers now and driven north of a million miles. I’ve seen bad driving among the drunk and the sober, among the fast and the slow and arbitrary limits are simply wrong in determining good or bad driving. They are a means to and end as you hinted at in your post.

(BTW, I don’t blame the police who’s job it is to enforce the law. It is the law that is wrong here and what actually constitutes an offence, I think).

If you have been driving for 40 years, you will remember the attitudes to drink driving. Accepted as the norm, and even worse in the countryside. Get a good lawyer and you could get away with anything pretty much. Remember stories from my dad about people they used to pull over who couldn’t walk after getting out the car and knew it would be a fight to get a conviction, serial dd offenders who would walk out of a pub and drive home hammered. Now attitudes have changed, and the arbitrary test discriminates against those over a number on a piece of paper. Right or wrong limit? Impossible to answer, but better than before. The US system still relies on a number for prosecution, the sobriety test is there to justify the test, other wise they cannot request evidential test.

In terms of speeding, you have to start somewhere I guess. Again rightly or wrongly, it’s an absolute offence, under is fine, over not so. We all know the number. What is safe for you driving along a road may not be deemed safe by over enthusiastic plod, so you end up with no one actually knowing the speed. You think 50, others may think 20, others still 100. How rich do we think lawyers would get from a simple speeding offence and how long would the case go on for? Meanwhile plod is sat inside court waiting in case he gets called again to give evidence.

And yes agreed totally on driving standards being pretty shocking, with little in the way of controlling them.

John, we could debate this for years.

Clearly arbitrary limits can be a useful guideline and offenders accused of an offence (whether or not they are prosecuted) could be put on prabation so that the guideline becomes their absolute limit if accused of any further offence. So many ‘innocent’ people have now got criminal records because they were momentarily careless, and nowhere near dangerous.

Such prosecutions create mistrust and alienates the very people who would normally support Mr Plod in pursuit of his duties. What’s worse is that it turns the less competent into speedo watchers rather than road watchers.It simply isn’t a good law in my opinion.

Yes, it will be satisfying to see them acknowledge their errors.

A couple of things to ponder when it comes to speed . .

In the light of all this blatant criminality, thank goodness we have shining beacons of virtue like Sean

20+ mph on a push bike, it’s fun blitzing past cars.

Could be worse. Give it 10 years and there will be gps based speed limiters on everything anyway. That will be a sad day.

If you don’t think it will happen, take a look at trucks and coaches.

I did one the other day, great fun. Just wanted a copper to jump out at me with a radar gun. :smiley:

If you come to Richmond Park and exceed the 20mph limit they will do exactly that!

I actually believe there are certain nanny devices that should be made mandatory, for one something that ensures safe braking distance. Sadly most people driving on the motorways today are f*cking morons and should not be allowed behind the wheel of a pram let alone a car.
If everyone on the motorway maintained a safe braking distance you would probably half road deaths and traffic jams, its not difficult but the number of complete tools I see driving far to close is incredible, jumping on and off the brakes and switching lanes into spaces causing everyone behind to slam on (because there distances are not great enough either).
Speed is usually not the factor, its piss poor driving standards. If you try to leave a safe distance somebody jumps in it.
Would be easily sorted with either a sensor that applied the brakes to maintain safe distance depending on speed or even simpler an alarm to drive you nuts like the seatbelt one.

And don’t get me started on what the hell happens to people the minute you throw an extra lane into the equation…

Hear, hear, Boothy