How late can you receive a NIP and it still be valid
Discussion
andoverben said:
Not sure how to edit that I thought I was looking at a Street View of the B3420 Winchester Road after the Hairpin heading toward the Deristricted sign whereas what seems to have come up is a Map of Wherwell
.https://maps.google.co.uk/maps?q=wherwell&hl=e...
I would feel more at risk obeying the speed limit than exceeding it there. There is a danger of being rear ended at 30MPH or less on a rural road like that. The OP with local knowledge is spot on, they are there for traffic appproaching the village round the corner.
Revenue raising and another failure by the state to ensure the safety of its ciizens IMHO. If elected Police commissiniares address this sort of misuse of public assets they will be money well spent.
Revenue raising and another failure by the state to ensure the safety of its ciizens IMHO. If elected Police commissiniares address this sort of misuse of public assets they will be money well spent.
clyffepypard said:
You know damn well the relevance of whether it is a known accident spot, Any more stupid comments?
Do you think it is more stupid than presuming that the only two reasons for speed enforcement by humans are because there have already been accidents or to raise revenue? The latter being an exceptionally stupid concept.Edited by Frix on Monday 15th October 09:31
Red Devil said:
andoverben said:
Not sure how to edit that I thought I was looking at a Street View of the B3420 Winchester Road after the Hairpin heading toward the Deristricted sign whereas what seems to have come up is a Map of Wherwell
.https://maps.google.co.uk/maps?q=wherwell&hl=e...
Frix said:
clyffepypard said:
You know damn well the relevance of whether it is a known accident spot, Any more stupid comments?
Do you think it is more stupid than presuming that the only two reasons for speed enforcement by humans are because there have already been accidents or to raise revenue? The latter being an exceptionally stupid concept.Edited by Frix on Monday 15th October 09:31
simoid said:
Clearly 43mph at one side of the sign is much more dangerous than 60mph at the other side, and therefore must be prevented at all revenues costs.
I'm not going to try and defend every location and rationale used for speed enforcement. That said self-discipline costs nothing. I just object to the self-righteous "cynics" who appear incapable of answering a straight question. y2blade said:
Red Devil said:
andoverben said:
Not sure how to edit that I thought I was looking at a Street View of the B3420 Winchester Road after the Hairpin heading toward the Deristricted sign whereas what seems to have come up is a Map of Wherwell
.https://maps.google.co.uk/maps?q=wherwell&hl=e...
https://maps.google.co.uk/maps?q=wherwell&hl=e...
Furry Exocet said:
Not difficult at all and not really that time consuming. Stand with laser and aim at the speed limit sign, record the distance in pocket notebook. Sight first car and record the speed and distance.
What happens if the laser shows the speed limit sign was travelling at, say, 10 mph ? 
Frix said:
Do you think it is more stupid than presuming that the only two reasons for speed enforcement by humans are because there have already been accidents or to raise revenue? The latter being an exceptionally stupid concept.
No, there is only one and that is revenue generation. The rules for siting cameras are flawed in the first place. Secondly all the data available points to speed in excess of the speed limit only be the primary cause in less than 3% of accidents. Cameras can only catch speeeders, not the far more prevalent causes of accidents such as aggressive or dangerous driving, lack of concentration, poor driver skills etc.Edited by Frix on Monday 15th October 09:31
Van-operated speeding enforcement is mostly conducted by parking the van in a not very visible location, particularly where there is more chance of people speeding such as just before/after a limit change, inside a newly speed restricted road section, on a downhll section etc.
Since millions of people in the UK intentionally speed every day, and millions more unintentionally speed every day at some point in their journey it is fairly obviously not an inherently dangerous activity. Yet there is this blind insistence on enforcement that takes away resource from policing the far more important aspects of driving.
FYI I have never been prosecuted in 35 years of driving, have owned quite a few fast cars, drive to the conditions at all times, obey all 30mph limits as far as possible (yes, I do drift over occasionally as I prefer to watch what is going on outside rather than watch the speedo). I do agree with sensible speed limits, but, there are far too many that have been artificially reduced with no good reason. Also I believe the motorway speed limit should be raised in line with European limits (80 or 85mph).
KevinA4quattro said:
No, there is only one and that is revenue generation. The rules for siting cameras are flawed in the first place. Secondly all the data available points to speed in excess of the speed limit only be the primary cause in less than 3% of accidents. Cameras can only catch speeeders, not the far more prevalent causes of accidents such as aggressive or dangerous driving, lack of concentration, poor driver skills etc.
Van-operated speeding enforcement is mostly conducted by parking the van in a not very visible location, particularly where there is more chance of people speeding such as just before/after a limit change, inside a newly speed restricted road section, on a downhll section etc.
Since millions of people in the UK intentionally speed every day, and millions more unintentionally speed every day at some point in their journey it is fairly obviously not an inherently dangerous activity. Yet there is this blind insistence on enforcement that takes away resource from policing the far more important aspects of driving.
FYI I have never been prosecuted in 35 years of driving, have owned quite a few fast cars, drive to the conditions at all times, obey all 30mph limits as far as possible (yes, I do drift over occasionally as I prefer to watch what is going on outside rather than watch the speedo). I do agree with sensible speed limits, but, there are far too many that have been artificially reduced with no good reason. Also I believe the motorway speed limit should be raised in line with European limits (80 or 85mph).
Oh God, he's going to explode! Surprised pratsmansboots hasn't been along yet trying to justify the imaginary threat posed by driving away from the village 12mph too quick within spitting distance of the de restriction Van-operated speeding enforcement is mostly conducted by parking the van in a not very visible location, particularly where there is more chance of people speeding such as just before/after a limit change, inside a newly speed restricted road section, on a downhll section etc.
Since millions of people in the UK intentionally speed every day, and millions more unintentionally speed every day at some point in their journey it is fairly obviously not an inherently dangerous activity. Yet there is this blind insistence on enforcement that takes away resource from policing the far more important aspects of driving.
FYI I have never been prosecuted in 35 years of driving, have owned quite a few fast cars, drive to the conditions at all times, obey all 30mph limits as far as possible (yes, I do drift over occasionally as I prefer to watch what is going on outside rather than watch the speedo). I do agree with sensible speed limits, but, there are far too many that have been artificially reduced with no good reason. Also I believe the motorway speed limit should be raised in line with European limits (80 or 85mph).
jaf01uk said:
KevinA4quattro said:
No, there is only one and that is revenue generation. The rules for siting cameras are flawed in the first place. Secondly all the data available points to speed in excess of the speed limit only be the primary cause in less than 3% of accidents. Cameras can only catch speeeders, not the far more prevalent causes of accidents such as aggressive or dangerous driving, lack of concentration, poor driver skills etc.
Van-operated speeding enforcement is mostly conducted by parking the van in a not very visible location, particularly where there is more chance of people speeding such as just before/after a limit change, inside a newly speed restricted road section, on a downhll section etc.
Since millions of people in the UK intentionally speed every day, and millions more unintentionally speed every day at some point in their journey it is fairly obviously not an inherently dangerous activity. Yet there is this blind insistence on enforcement that takes away resource from policing the far more important aspects of driving.
FYI I have never been prosecuted in 35 years of driving, have owned quite a few fast cars, drive to the conditions at all times, obey all 30mph limits as far as possible (yes, I do drift over occasionally as I prefer to watch what is going on outside rather than watch the speedo). I do agree with sensible speed limits, but, there are far too many that have been artificially reduced with no good reason. Also I believe the motorway speed limit should be raised in line with European limits (80 or 85mph).
Oh God, he's going to explode! Surprised pratsmansboots hasn't been along yet trying to justify the imaginary threat posed by driving away from the village 12mph too quick within spitting distance of the de restriction Van-operated speeding enforcement is mostly conducted by parking the van in a not very visible location, particularly where there is more chance of people speeding such as just before/after a limit change, inside a newly speed restricted road section, on a downhll section etc.
Since millions of people in the UK intentionally speed every day, and millions more unintentionally speed every day at some point in their journey it is fairly obviously not an inherently dangerous activity. Yet there is this blind insistence on enforcement that takes away resource from policing the far more important aspects of driving.
FYI I have never been prosecuted in 35 years of driving, have owned quite a few fast cars, drive to the conditions at all times, obey all 30mph limits as far as possible (yes, I do drift over occasionally as I prefer to watch what is going on outside rather than watch the speedo). I do agree with sensible speed limits, but, there are far too many that have been artificially reduced with no good reason. Also I believe the motorway speed limit should be raised in line with European limits (80 or 85mph).
KevinA4quattro said:
No, there is only one and that is revenue generation. The rules for siting cameras are flawed in the first place. Secondly all the data available points to speed in excess of the speed limit only be the primary cause in less than 3% of accidents. Cameras can only catch speeeders, not the far more prevalent causes of accidents such as aggressive or dangerous driving, lack of concentration, poor driver skills etc.
Van-operated speeding enforcement is mostly conducted by parking the van in a not very visible location, particularly where there is more chance of people speeding such as just before/after a limit change, inside a newly speed restricted road section, on a downhll section etc.
Since millions of people in the UK intentionally speed every day, and millions more unintentionally speed every day at some point in their journey it is fairly obviously not an inherently dangerous activity. Yet there is this blind insistence on enforcement that takes away resource from policing the far more important aspects of driving.
FYI I have never been prosecuted in 35 years of driving, have owned quite a few fast cars, drive to the conditions at all times, obey all 30mph limits as far as possible (yes, I do drift over occasionally as I prefer to watch what is going on outside rather than watch the speedo). I do agree with sensible speed limits, but, there are far too many that have been artificially reduced with no good reason. Also I believe the motorway speed limit should be raised in line with European limits (80 or 85mph).
Why agree with speed limits if it is "not an inherently dangerous activity"? Surely it would be OK to remove them?Van-operated speeding enforcement is mostly conducted by parking the van in a not very visible location, particularly where there is more chance of people speeding such as just before/after a limit change, inside a newly speed restricted road section, on a downhll section etc.
Since millions of people in the UK intentionally speed every day, and millions more unintentionally speed every day at some point in their journey it is fairly obviously not an inherently dangerous activity. Yet there is this blind insistence on enforcement that takes away resource from policing the far more important aspects of driving.
FYI I have never been prosecuted in 35 years of driving, have owned quite a few fast cars, drive to the conditions at all times, obey all 30mph limits as far as possible (yes, I do drift over occasionally as I prefer to watch what is going on outside rather than watch the speedo). I do agree with sensible speed limits, but, there are far too many that have been artificially reduced with no good reason. Also I believe the motorway speed limit should be raised in line with European limits (80 or 85mph).
Could it be that the setting of speed limits and their enforcement is what ensures that the roads are not a free-for-all? No enforcement = do what you like. Not a good situation I would think.
Speed enforcement is polcing. My department does it regularly. As I've said - I'm not going to defend every enforcement action. There are ways of getting it done sensibly and this doesn't always happen. Curiously while conducting this particular policing activity we detect the unlicensed, uninsured, drunk, stoned and generally unsuitable drivers that people whinge that speed enforcement doesn't do.
I feel the OP's pain. We all know places where for 100 yrds before the NSL sign there are no houses, no trees, no people, and we all know people who accelerate away from 30 and have reached 60 by the sigh.
In all these cases that we know, we also know there is no less danger before or after the NSL sign, and the NSL sign is attached to the back of a 30 sign in order to save the cost of a steel pipe.
In all these cases that we know, we also know there is no less danger before or after the NSL sign, and the NSL sign is attached to the back of a 30 sign in order to save the cost of a steel pipe.
Red Devil said:
Has to be the layby on the right (looking back towards Wherwell).
https://maps.google.co.uk/maps?q=wherwell&hl=e...
It was indeed there, I was coming round the Left Hand Bend Leaving the Village, stupidly I actually saw the van for several seconds and didn't make the connection to brake since I was looking at the Deristricted Sign at the Same time and thought what a silly place for a Van who whould be doing 60 heading toward the Village when there is a Hairpin Bend round that Corner. Of course by the time I had clicked that of course I must still be in the 30 and therefore it was pointed at me it was too latehttps://maps.google.co.uk/maps?q=wherwell&hl=e...
One of my favourite games is to accelerate as hard as I can the moment the car/bike passes the imaginary line between the signs. Childish but the only bloody legal fun you can have on the road nowadays. STILL got pulled over by the BIB once for 'accelerating unnecessarily heavily'. (wtf?) and got told off. Miserable b
ds. 
ds. Frix said:
Speed enforcement is polcing. My department does it regularly. As I've said - I'm not going to defend every enforcement action. There are ways of getting it done sensibly and this doesn't always happen. Curiously while conducting this particular policing activity we detect the unlicensed, uninsured, drunk, stoned and generally unsuitable drivers that people whinge that speed enforcement doesn't do.
Genuine question:If a speeding car is snapped by a Gatso or a man in a van, does anyone check if that car is taxed or insured before sending the invoice. Sorry I meant to type ticket.
I don't know how cameras can ever catch the mad, the bad, the drunk or the stoned. I don't have any objection to real polcing on the road, but cameras smack to me and many others of ENFORCEMENT on the cheap, if not downright revenue-raisers.
GoneAnon said:
Frix said:
Speed enforcement is polcing. My department does it regularly. As I've said - I'm not going to defend every enforcement action. There are ways of getting it done sensibly and this doesn't always happen. Curiously while conducting this particular policing activity we detect the unlicensed, uninsured, drunk, stoned and generally unsuitable drivers that people whinge that speed enforcement doesn't do.
Genuine question:If a speeding car is snapped by a Gatso or a man in a van, does anyone check if that car is taxed or insured before sending the invoice. Sorry I meant to type ticket.
I don't know how cameras can ever catch the mad, the bad, the drunk or the stoned. I don't have any objection to real polcing on the road, but cameras smack to me and many others of ENFORCEMENT on the cheap, if not downright revenue-raisers.
Gary
jaf01uk said:
GoneAnon said:
Frix said:
Speed enforcement is polcing. My department does it regularly. As I've said - I'm not going to defend every enforcement action. There are ways of getting it done sensibly and this doesn't always happen. Curiously while conducting this particular policing activity we detect the unlicensed, uninsured, drunk, stoned and generally unsuitable drivers that people whinge that speed enforcement doesn't do.
Genuine question:If a speeding car is snapped by a Gatso or a man in a van, does anyone check if that car is taxed or insured before sending the invoice. Sorry I meant to type ticket.
I don't know how cameras can ever catch the mad, the bad, the drunk or the stoned. I don't have any objection to real polcing on the road, but cameras smack to me and many others of ENFORCEMENT on the cheap, if not downright revenue-raisers.
Gary
GoneAnon said:
Genuine question:
If a speeding car is snapped by a Gatso or a man in a van, does anyone check if that car is taxed or insured before sending the invoice. Sorry I meant to type ticket.
I don't know how cameras can ever catch the mad, the bad, the drunk or the stoned. I don't have any objection to real polcing on the road, but cameras smack to me and many others of ENFORCEMENT on the cheap, if not downright revenue-raisers.
Not sure that they do. It was referred to on another thread - insurance can't be enforced by camera. Tax is constantly monitered by DVLA anyway so no real reason to add an extra check.If a speeding car is snapped by a Gatso or a man in a van, does anyone check if that car is taxed or insured before sending the invoice. Sorry I meant to type ticket.
I don't know how cameras can ever catch the mad, the bad, the drunk or the stoned. I don't have any objection to real polcing on the road, but cameras smack to me and many others of ENFORCEMENT on the cheap, if not downright revenue-raisers.
Camera's will catch the mad bad excetera but can only enforce speed. No-one has claimed that they are suitable for enforcement of offences other than speed. I don't think they are ideal enforcement but I prefer it to the alternative of virtually no enforcement.
What I'm getting at is that if the Scamera Partnerships key the reg numbers of their "customers" into the MID and the RFL databases, it would be more productive to send the boys round and do the guilty for all three offences instead of just sending a bill for the speeding - if the cameras did something about those offences it might help their image or it might not, but it won't do anything to harm it.
Having said that, I don't approve of speed cameras and genuinely believe that they are simply cash-machines. I have a great deal of respect for our police and would be more inclined to accept the key points of a telling off AND to modify my behaviour when dealt with by a professional, instead of after getting a bill in the post. As for the "victim surcharge", who was the victim of my 80mph on a dry, quiet motorway? Did they get the cash? Can I check?
Having said that, I don't approve of speed cameras and genuinely believe that they are simply cash-machines. I have a great deal of respect for our police and would be more inclined to accept the key points of a telling off AND to modify my behaviour when dealt with by a professional, instead of after getting a bill in the post. As for the "victim surcharge", who was the victim of my 80mph on a dry, quiet motorway? Did they get the cash? Can I check?
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff