Caught doing 43 in a 30

[martinbiz]

trumpton7291 said:

martinbiz said:

trumpton7291 said:

Or maybe get out of it completely…

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-202833/Ch...

You don’t always have to bow down and pay the tax.

That was a long time ago. The Hamilton defence as it became known was probably the catalyst for the bar being raised for a successful reasonable diligence defence, just saying sorry we both drove and can't remember who it was, alone, is very unlikely to be accepted today

Plenty of viable defences to use, even today, just take a bit of effort, of course most have been terrified into rolling over at the first sign of a NIP and paying whether they are actually guilty or not.

Viable defences to failing to furnish? Please enlighten us with your in depth knowledge

[NFT]

martinbiz said:

trumpton7291 said:

martinbiz said:

trumpton7291 said:

Or maybe get out of it completely…

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-202833/Ch...

You don’t always have to bow down and pay the tax.

That was a long time ago. The Hamilton defence as it became known was probably the catalyst for the bar being raised for a successful reasonable diligence defence, just saying sorry we both drove and can't remember who it was, alone, is very unlikely to be accepted today

Plenty of viable defences to use, even today, just take a bit of effort, of course most have been terrified into rolling over at the first sign of a NIP and paying whether they are actually guilty or not.

Viable defences to failing to furnish? Please enlighten us with your in depth knowledge

I hope one isn't: It was sold just 5 minutes before, to a passer by, whose name, details and number I never got, but they changed their mind, so I bought it back that day, looks like me too, Honest!

Remember, with Ticket Office: Excuses lead to nooses.

Edited by NFT on Saturday 24th February 20:55

[martinbiz]

NFT said:

martinbiz said:

trumpton7291 said:

martinbiz said:

trumpton7291 said:

Or maybe get out of it completely…

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-202833/Ch...

You don’t always have to bow down and pay the tax.

That was a long time ago. The Hamilton defence as it became known was probably the catalyst for the bar being raised for a successful reasonable diligence defence, just saying sorry we both drove and can't remember who it was, alone, is very unlikely to be accepted today

Plenty of viable defences to use, even today, just take a bit of effort, of course most have been terrified into rolling over at the first sign of a NIP and paying whether they are actually guilty or not.

Viable defences to failing to furnish? Please enlighten us with your in depth knowledge

I hope one isn't: It was sold just 5 minutes before, to a passer by, whose name, details and number I never got, but they changed their mind, so I bought it back that day, looks like me too, Honest!

Remember, with Ticket Office: Excuses lead to nooses.

I did say viable

Edited by NFT on Saturday 24th February 20:55

[NFT]

martinbiz said:

I did say viable

Indeed you did, my apologies martinbiz.

[TwigtheWonderkid]

trumpton7291 said:

TwigtheWonderkid said:

trumpton7291 said:

TwigtheWonderkid said:

anonymous-user said:

Are you sure you were driving? Maybe a neighbour had borrowed the car before leaving the country on urgent business...

Yes, exactly. Are you sure you want to take the points? You could pervert the course of justice instead, and maybe end up doing jail time.

Or maybe get out of it completely…

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-202833/Ch...

You don’t always have to bow down and pay the tax.

It's not a tax. There is no "war on the motorist". And quite frankly, I'd rather take the points and pay the fine than have to look in the mirror and think to myself that I sunk as low as those two st gibbons

There is unquestionably a war on the motorist, it’s happening today. The idea is to make driving as unpleasant as possible and price it out of most peoples’ reach. Unfortunately public transport where it exists is vastly worse and also more expensive. But still maybe when everyone is beyond twelve points they’ll have succeeded.

I live in London and I don't think there's a war on the motorist. It's as ridiculous as someone saying, because the ban on selling new petrol and diesel cars has been put back from 2030 to 2035, that there's a war on the environment.

[Heaveho]

crofty1984 said:

I got done for 44 in a 30 and it was 3 points and a fine.

Exactly what I was done for with the same outcome. 2016

[NFT]

TwigtheWonderkid said:

trumpton7291 said:

TwigtheWonderkid said:

trumpton7291 said:

TwigtheWonderkid said:

anonymous-user said:

Are you sure you were driving? Maybe a neighbour had borrowed the car before leaving the country on urgent business...

Yes, exactly. Are you sure you want to take the points? You could pervert the course of justice instead, and maybe end up doing jail time.

Or maybe get out of it completely…

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-202833/Ch...

You don’t always have to bow down and pay the tax.

It's not a tax. There is no "war on the motorist". And quite frankly, I'd rather take the points and pay the fine than have to look in the mirror and think to myself that I sunk as low as those two st gibbons

There is unquestionably a war on the motorist, it’s happening today. The idea is to make driving as unpleasant as possible and price it out of most peoples’ reach. Unfortunately public transport where it exists is vastly worse and also more expensive. But still maybe when everyone is beyond twelve points they’ll have succeeded.

I live in London and I don't think there's a war on the motorist. It's as ridiculous as someone saying, because the ban on selling new petrol and diesel cars has been put back from 2030 to 2035, that there's a war on the environment.

I think there is needless problems, control, cash cow & political agenda policy's. Seems very much like a war at times, but may just be evidence of what happens when the majority roll over as it isn't important to them, or its just a small change at the time whilst it becomes the next generations norm.

I look back at history, you could open bank accounts without ID, travel vast distances without cameras, limits weren't so slow everywhere, its changed a heck of a lot, and its generational normalization that lets it get worse as each new layer and rule comes in to an ever more docile society.

Let them see it, but not razor-sharp, the majority will let it be, and they won't have done what they know they should have when looking back, less able and willing to act.

[Ian Geary]

NFT said:

I think there is needless problems, control, cash cow & political agenda policy's. Seems very much like a war at times, but may just be evidence of what happens when the majority roll over as it isn't important to them, or its just a small change at the time whilst it becomes the next generations norm.

I look back at history, you could open bank accounts without ID, travel vast distances without cameras, limits weren't so slow everywhere, its changed a heck of a lot, and its generational normalization that lets it get worse as each new layer and rule comes in to an ever more docile society.

Let them see it, but not razor-sharp, the majority will let it be, and they won't have done what they know they should have when looking back, less able and willing to act.

If this feels like a war to some, I can only imagine they have never been in a war. (I haven't, but then I'm not saying it).

I got caught speeding 48 in a 30 the other day. Is it a tax? No. I broke the very clear rules on speed, got caught breaking the rules, and will happily pay £100, knowing I was 2mph off a summons.

I'd rather not get caught breaking the rules of course, but not as much as I'd rather not break them in the first place.

As for the other stuff

- opening bank accounts with id? What could possibly go wrong? Cue the rants about bank fraud

- travel without cameras everywhere? I got caught by an unmarked car. Cameras are easy to spot and slow down for, even the new ones

Rolling over? Part of adulthood is accepting consequences. You should give it a go sometime. Speeding isn't always unsafe, but it is always illegal.

[NFT]

Ian Geary said:

NFT said:

I think there is needless problems, control, cash cow & political agenda policy's. Seems very much like a war at times, but may just be evidence of what happens when the majority roll over as it isn't important to them, or its just a small change at the time whilst it becomes the next generations norm.

I look back at history, you could open bank accounts without ID, travel vast distances without cameras, limits weren't so slow everywhere, its changed a heck of a lot, and its generational normalization that lets it get worse as each new layer and rule comes in to an ever more docile society.

Let them see it, but not razor-sharp, the majority will let it be, and they won't have done what they know they should have when looking back, less able and willing to act.

If this feels like a war to some, I can only imagine they have never been in a war. (I haven't, but then I'm not saying it).

I got caught speeding 48 in a 30 the other day. Is it a tax? No. I broke the very clear rules on speed, got caught breaking the rules, and will happily pay £100, knowing I was 2mph off a summons.

I'd rather not get caught breaking the rules of course, but not as much as I'd rather not break them in the first place.

As for the other stuff

- opening bank accounts with id? What could possibly go wrong? Cue the rants about bank fraud

- travel without cameras everywhere? I got caught by an unmarked car. Cameras are easy to spot and slow down for, even the new ones

Rolling over? Part of adulthood is accepting consequences. You should give it a go sometime. Speeding isn't always unsafe, but it is always illegal.

Oops, think I miscommunicated with someone's police state creep-up type post elsewhere in mind. Sorry Ian Geary,