thenodrog Posted February 4, 2009 Posted February 4, 2009 http://cars.aol.co.uk/legal-ruling-due-on-...316104953695329 Hmm I may live to regret fighting for my rights and seeing those bullying gits being forced to scrap their attempted and wrongful convictions against me in the past. I could be due a nice draw soon.
This thread is brought to you by theterracestore.com Enter code `BRFCS` at checkout for an exclusive discount!
colin Posted February 5, 2009 Posted February 5, 2009 Go on then. I'll take the bait Lawyers are arguing at Manchester Crown Court that all devices authorised since 1992 are illegal because the law introducing them on to British roads had been wrongly implemented by successive home secretaries. Secretary Of State for Transport probably. That may be mistake No.1 Retired computer engineer Aitken Brotherston, 61, of Lymm, Cheshire, has brought the case on appeal against his conviction for driving 52mph in a 40mph zone. Another saddo who can't quite grasp the concept of a speed limit and how to stick to it. If he can be a computer engineer how can he be so thick as to not recognise a speed limit sign. He must be a bit like Homer. "mmmm floor pie...."
thenodrog Posted February 5, 2009 Author Posted February 5, 2009 Go on then. I'll take the bait Took you long enough! I must be slipping my money was on Jim.
yoda Posted February 6, 2009 Posted February 6, 2009 The Government should be prosecuted for allowing cars to be produced which are capable of breaking the law and while we are at it, I don't want a fine from an average speed camera! with the money they are racking in I want a fine from a top of the range all singing all dancing speed camera
dave birch Posted February 6, 2009 Posted February 6, 2009 The Government should be prosecuted for allowing cars to be produced which are capable of breaking the law and while we are at it, I don't want a fine from an average speed camera! with the money they are racking in I want a fine from a top of the range all singing all dancing speed camera No, the rest of the world should be shielded from those tomatos that can't understand that the speed limits are for everyone. If you are unable to keep you vehicle within the prescibed limits, then you shouldn't be driving, full stop. If you don't want to have your photograph taken by an average speed camera, then get one taken when you are doing an average speed. That should solve the problem.
BuckyRover Posted February 6, 2009 Posted February 6, 2009 I am not a driver myself. But my girlfriend has been a driver for a good few years and has managed not to get a speeding ticket in that time, she always breaks the speed limit though. I have no sympathy for speeding drivers. If you want to do it, that's fine but don't moan when you get caught.
thenodrog Posted February 6, 2009 Author Posted February 6, 2009 I am not a driver myself. But my girlfriend has been a driver for a good few years and has managed not to get a speeding ticket in that time, she always breaks the speed limit though. I have no sympathy for speeding drivers. I bet you daren't tell her that if you cannot pass the test! You'd be on Shank's Pony in double quick time.
tony gale's mic Posted February 6, 2009 Posted February 6, 2009 I am not a driver myself. But my girlfriend has been a driver for a good few years and has managed not to get a speeding ticket in that time, she always breaks the speed limit though. I have no sympathy for speeding drivers. If you want to do it, that's fine but don't moan when you get caught. Agreed. People who complain about speed cameras are ludicrous. Mind you they're the sort of people who treat Richard Littlejohn as some sort of demigod.
jim mk2 Posted February 6, 2009 Posted February 6, 2009 Good luck to Gordon with his case. Compensation should pay for a 5th bog in his two-up two-down.
Majiball Posted February 6, 2009 Posted February 6, 2009 Sweet, could be due some money. On the whole speed limit thing I have no issues in and around town, but the motorway limit should be raised. Its daft cars are much improved and yet by law it still takes the same travel time it did 30-40 years ago. 100 mph for me on the motorway at least please, its not an issue on the Banhof.
jim mk2 Posted February 6, 2009 Posted February 6, 2009 . 100 mph for me on the motorway at least please, its not an issue on the Banhof. If you want to kill yourself (and others), go and drive on the autobahns. Meanwhile sensible people are happy to travel at 70mph on the motorway and obey the driving laws.
AlanK Posted February 6, 2009 Posted February 6, 2009 Oh come on Jim. With todays cars, if you are doing 70 on the motorway you will be the slowest car on there.
jim mk2 Posted February 6, 2009 Posted February 6, 2009 Oh come on Jim. With todays cars, if you are doing 70 on the motorway you will be the slowest car on there. Sometimes happens, but that doesn't mean exceeding the limit is right. Either we have a 70mph limit, and it is enforced, or we don't. There is a solution of course, which is that average speed cameras should be installed on all motorways and trunk roads. And it would also help if everyone owned their own cars : amazing how private drivers have the best driving habits.
thenodrog Posted February 6, 2009 Author Posted February 6, 2009 Oh come on Jim. With todays cars, if you are doing 70 on the motorway you will be the slowest car on there. Correct. I slowed down to 70mph the other day on the M65 in the slow lane cos I had a long text to make and was struggling to eat a sandwich with my other hand (and I dont think it's safe to steer with the knees at anything faster) and absolutely everybody else was flying past me. And it would also help if everyone owned their own cars : amazing how private drivers have the best driving habits. Can we have your facts to prove that please Magoo?
thenodrog Posted February 6, 2009 Author Posted February 6, 2009 Good luck to Gordon with his case. Compensation should pay for a 5th bog in his two-up two-down. I've no case to answer. What I was trying to say was that I could have had a nice draw if all the trumped up charges had not been dropped for one reason or another. btw Why should I want another toilet Jim? Maybe a 3rd and 4th bidet could be handy. Cleanliness is next to Godliness you know, or would you rather stick to the standard shiny Izal in your nursing home?
DeadlyDirk Posted February 6, 2009 Posted February 6, 2009 The reason why I don't think standard speed cameras are the answer as they only catch tourists usually or people who are not in the area very often. Locals know exactly where they are and simply slow down when they reach a camera only to speed up again until they reach the next one. If they continue to use speed cameras they should at least all be mobile ones, then they may actually work to stop ths speeders.
colin Posted February 7, 2009 Posted February 7, 2009 Took you long enough! Just thought I'd keep you in a state of moist anticipation for a few hours. I hope you enjoyed it. Tiger. BTW I bet you daren't tell her that if you cannot pass the test! Bucky didn't say he couldn't pass the test. He said he didn't drive. Pay attention or you'll be sitting at the front of the class for the rest of the term. You're already on a yellow card from the apostrophe police.
yoda Posted February 7, 2009 Posted February 7, 2009 Hasn't the Government's own study not shown speed cameras to be inefective in controling speed on the roads though?
dave birch Posted February 7, 2009 Posted February 7, 2009 The laws that we have, and that includes speed cameras, have reduced the number of deaths to lower than that in the 1940's. Think about it, number of vehicles, population etc. It just goes to show, that if you hit people around the wallet enough, they'll get the message.
yoda Posted February 7, 2009 Posted February 7, 2009 The laws that we have, and that includes speed cameras, have reduced the number of deaths to lower than that in the 1940's. Think about it, number of vehicles, population etc. It just goes to show, that if you hit people around the wallet enough, they'll get the message. Then again, prevention is better than cure!
dave birch Posted February 7, 2009 Posted February 7, 2009 Then again, prevention is better than cure! I'm not sure I understand your meaning? Laws that have saved countless lives. Is there a problem with that?
yoda Posted February 7, 2009 Posted February 7, 2009 I'm not sure I understand your meaning? Laws that have saved countless lives. Is there a problem with that? Absolutly not, but if the cars could not break the speed limit in the 1st place? The government are now considering having speed limiters fitted to new cars in the not to distant future based on Sat Nav technology. I think they are finally waking up to the fact that self regulation does not work and they could be culpable by giving type approval in the 1st place
BuckyRover Posted February 7, 2009 Posted February 7, 2009 I bet you daren't tell her that if you cannot pass the test! You'd be on Shank's Pony in double quick time. I passed my theory a couple of weeks ago. 98% But driving is a blag. I have only had a few lessons. I am insured on the car as well but rarely take up the opportunity. I plan on arranging some lessons in a month (or so) when the evenings are lighter, so I can go after work.
American Posted February 7, 2009 Posted February 7, 2009 I'm not sure I understand your meaning? Laws that have saved countless lives. Is there a problem with that? One would also argue safer cars and new technology could be the reason all of the lives have been saved.
dave birch Posted February 7, 2009 Posted February 7, 2009 One would also argue safer cars and new technology could be the reason all of the lives have been saved. It probably has had some effect, but not 100%. There's no way you could stop someone from killing themselves (or someone else) if they were so inclined, but the laws introduced have had a major impact (like that?) on road fatalities
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.