This is not a debate about the rights or wrongs of speeding, that is a seperate matter completely.
nothing to stop us making it one…
The fooking point is that if you do get caught, hold your hand up, take it on the chin, & move on
but why, that’s not how our legal system works.
Although not directly related to thus particular instance, it does remind me that sveral roads in my area have been downgraded from 60mph to 40mph with a 30 mph right in the middle. Nothing appears to have physically changed in the environment and nobody is aware of any recent accidents or incidents.
If the law is an ass, then perhaps it will help make it better if more people challenge it. In that respect, it’s not doing the right thing to take it on the chin.
If the law is an ass, then perhaps it will help make it better if more people challenge it. In that respect, it’s not doing the right thing to take it on the chin.
There are proper ways to campaign to have the law changed. If you care to read my earlier post, you’ll see that I only favour camera enforcement where safety is the only reason.
I’m fooking grumpy because the selfish behaviour of the few, messes it up for the majority. This relates to very many aspects of life, not just motoring, & is a general comment, not a specifically aimed one.
The facts of the particular case in question will never be known outwith the 4 people involved, for patently obvious reasons.
Pesky I disagree entirely. It must be a personality thing - some people readily bend over and ‘play ball’ with the authorities, own up, take it on the chin, fine and points and all, despite the system currently in place not satisfying the ‘innocent until proven guilty’ foundation of our legal system.
Other people refuse to implicate themselves so readily and, rightfully, request that the prosecution prove the case against them.
Look, in the vast majority of “speeding cases” the person knows if they’re guilty, & if so, they should behave accordingly.
Pesky I disagree entirely. It must be a personality thing - some people readily bend over and ‘play ball’ with the authorities, own up, take it on the chin, fine and points and all, despite the system currently in place not satisfying the ‘innocent until proven guilty’ foundation of our legal system.
Other people refuse to implicate themselves so readily and, rightfully, request that the prosecution prove the case against them.
Look, in the vast majority of “speeding cases” the person knows if they’re guilty, & if so, they should behave accordingly.
Can I ask if you ever speed on the public highway ?
Can I ask if you ever speed on the public highway ?
If you look at my earlier posts, you’ll find the answer yourself. Anyone who doesn’t is not being truthful. Just to ram it home, I’m not debating the rights & wrongs of speeding here, just what happens when you get caught.
If the law is an ass, then perhaps it will help make it better if more people challenge it.
I seem to remember million peoples of people rejected the idea of road pricing and the government E-mailed them back saying “tough”. Given this government pays no heed to public opinion what do you propose the masses do ?
The facts of the particular case in question will never be known outwith the 4 people involved
Pesky I disagree entirely. It must be a personality thing - some people readily bend over and ‘play ball’ with the authorities, own up, take it on the chin, fine and points and all, despite the system currently in place not satisfying the ‘innocent until proven guilty’ foundation of our legal system.
Other people refuse to implicate themselves so readily and, rightfully, request that the prosecution prove the case against them.
Look, in the vast majority of “speeding cases” the person knows if they’re guilty, & if so, they should behave accordingly.
In the vast majority of all cases the person knows if they are guilty but it doesn’t stop the majority trying to get away with it so why should speeding be any different?
I seem to remember million peoples of people rejected the idea of road pricing and the government E-mailed them back saying “tough”. Given this government pays no heed to public opinion what do you propose the masses do ?
Simple - exercise their democratic rights, & actually vote at the next general election for the party who they believe best serves their interests. And yes, I did sign the petition, & yes I was pi$$ed off by this Govt’s response, but I still don’t believe in anarchy, & would be amazed if you do.
The facts of the particular case in question will never be known outwith the 4 people involved
And yet you feel able to comment ? [/quote]
Yes - I am perfectly entitled to comment on the “available” facts.
And no, I don’t want to fall out with you either, but an internet “full discussion” about your case is not appropriate. Happy to chill out over a beer or two with you, & have an amicable discussion, in due course.
we all speed but I think most of us save it for the 60Mph National speed limit area’s where there is much less risk involved.
and to get caught doing 34 in a 30 Mph zone can be a pitter also if you are keeping flow with other cars and dont want to stare at the speedo every 5 seconds to make sure you are doing 30Mph dead on getting 3 points for that is a arse.
But you stated the Range rover was caught doing 40Mph in a 30Mph area for that there is no excuse imho and I don’t see why you would want to fight that.
Ok, no problem with that. Its just a stealth tax anyway and my local coppers speed past my house on a regular basis. Everyone I have ever been in a car with speeds, yet the few who get caught are expected to roll over and take it for the masses. I dont agree with it but I dont want the gov to start limiting cars mph or using GPS based systems either …
MrD06 - in manchester everyone speeds everywhere all the time. Its mental, on washway road people regularly do 50+ and its a 30 zone.
And I have no problem with what you say either. The few spoiling it for the majority, & Washway Rd is a bloody nightmare at busy times of the day (will be negotiating my way along there at 5.45 today!).
I think it�s easy to forget what the laws are, and what they�re there for. The law is just a bunch of rules we put in place to protect society. Yes, this may be considered a case of getting off on a technicality, but isn�t the �offence� a product of the wording of the law too. The intent is to make the roads safer, was that driver, in that vehicle at that time travelling at 40mph dangerous? The legal limit should provide a reasonable level of safety at 3am on summer night and at 5pm on busy icy road crossed by pedestrians, can one rule reasonably cover both situations?
I�d argue that the �offence� is technicality and its just as justifiable as using those rules to �get away with it�. We have an adversarial legal system where both side use the framework provided to hopefully end up a point where dangerous behaviour is controlled. Is that not what the outcome of this case was? (Maybe, maybe not)
Personally I don�t thing we should follow rules blindly, but be aware of the intent, and the implications of breaching them.
In the vast majority of all cases the person knows if they are guilty but it doesn’t stop the majority trying to get away with it so why should speeding be any different?
If you’re caught & guilty, there’s nowt wrong in going for (honest) “mitigation”. Pleading innocence, whilst knowing full well you’re guilty is a different matter entirely.
Why the original post if you do not feel comment is appropriate?
Whether or not you were speeding is not the issue, the car was clocked & you were charged for failing to give evidence. You employ a barrister (not cheap, presumably) that somehow gets you off on a technicality. sure, your just playing the game that the law allows, but that is there to protect the innocent. Sadly this right occasionally allows the guilty off too.
One person in that car you own was caught & was not innocent. As the owner/registered keeper (whatever), you are responsible for the offence if no-one else is identified.
Maybe you will have the same view of the law, say, should you be so unfortunate as to be personally affected by a crime, & know/saw the offender who subsequently gets off on a technicality. It’d be the same thing.
The intent is to make the roads safer, was that driver, in that vehicle at that time travelling at 40mph dangerous? The legal limit should provide a reasonable level of safety at 3am on summer night and at 5pm on busy icy road crossed by pedestrians, can one rule reasonably cover both situations?
Point well made. Speed cameras blindly apply a rule, and no common sense.
A 1970s Ford Cortina, running on drum brakes, cross plys and 5 people on board in the pouring rain at 70mph on the motorway is legal, and yet a modern performance car, with modern tyres + brakes on a dry empty motorway at 75mph is illegal. A blind application of a rule “doing more than 70mph is dangerous” is incorrect to any reasonable person…
Not only that, how can it be that a modern car doing 75mph on a motorway in the UK is considered “dangerous”, but doing 75mph on a French road isn’t ?
I have been stopped before by the police, and considered it a fair cop guv.
