140 mph punishment.
Discussion
madcop said:
Would you rather a Police force and I mean force run on continental Europe type Policing standards?
Military based with gun toting meglamaniacs watching your every move?
Yes please. I have visited over 25 countries in the last 10 years and I have yet to find anywhere that the Police and officaldom are so obsessed with speed and apparently completely indifferent to the real problem, bad driving. Not to mention no interest at all when cars are stolen or broken into, of which I have extremely negative experiences with the Thames Valley mob. It is hardly surprising that anyone who takes an interest in motoring and has read the real facts in the TRRL reports about the causative and contributory factors due specifically to excess speed and heard those figures exaggerated beyond all belief by civil servants, local councils and Chief Constables alike, is going to think the current system sucks and maybe the Police could learn a thing or two from other countries.
Hmm we've really gotten away from the point here & I don't think the discussion's going anywhere..
I also am not sure everyone's being as constructive as they might (honourable exceptions noted).
I for one don't want a European style police force and yet nor do I want to face a term of imprisonment in the same order of magintude as a man who has sex with 13 year old girls, simply for a bit of speeding. Okay - 140mph is serious speed, but on the assumption that the car was designed to travel at that speed, it's no more than is achived within the law and with no apparent drawbacks in Germany.
I think the sentencing policies in this country are totally fcuked and I think that both the judiciary and the government are due a kick in the nuts over this nonsense.
I also am not sure everyone's being as constructive as they might (honourable exceptions noted).
I for one don't want a European style police force and yet nor do I want to face a term of imprisonment in the same order of magintude as a man who has sex with 13 year old girls, simply for a bit of speeding. Okay - 140mph is serious speed, but on the assumption that the car was designed to travel at that speed, it's no more than is achived within the law and with no apparent drawbacks in Germany.
I think the sentencing policies in this country are totally fcuked and I think that both the judiciary and the government are due a kick in the nuts over this nonsense.
Totally agree with you Carzee.
The thing that I get very, very, pi55ed off about is the fact that numpties doing 40mph on the sliproad when joining the motorway can go ahead unpunished, whereas that (and there's more examples..) is actually far more dangerous than driving over 100mph in the outside lane.
It's just so much easier (and it generates MUCH more revenue) catching anyone and everyone that's speeding rather than actually catching people driving badly.
Cheers,
Wim
>> Edited by wimdows on Friday 6th June 23:30
The thing that I get very, very, pi55ed off about is the fact that numpties doing 40mph on the sliproad when joining the motorway can go ahead unpunished, whereas that (and there's more examples..) is actually far more dangerous than driving over 100mph in the outside lane.
It's just so much easier (and it generates MUCH more revenue) catching anyone and everyone that's speeding rather than actually catching people driving badly.
Cheers,
Wim
>> Edited by wimdows on Friday 6th June 23:30
Without wishing to rain on anyones parade, I was driving on lightly congested dual carriageways for a couple of hours this afternoon at speeds between 120 and 140mph. (I do this quite regularly)
I was paying attention, being conscious of speed differentials, and being considerate by pulling over when faster traffic approached. I certainly didn't feel that I was behaving in a manner that could be construed as irresponsible and warranted locking up for my heinous crimes. In fact had I been in the TVR I would have certainly been driving faster! As it was, the Hertz luxo-barge I had was flat out so wouldn't go any faster anyway. Sadly my motoring Nirvana ended all too soon with my arrival at the airport, subsequent departure from Germany and arrival back in sad little England.
Now I wouldn't dream of driving at those speeds on most UK roads (particularly witnessing the standards of driving on the M27/A31 tonight!), but this thread got me wondering why (laws notwithstanding).
I believe the major reasons are; lack of observation, poor lane discipline and lack of spatial awareness by most UK drivers. You feel that the typical German autobahn user knows you are approaching, and reacts accordingly, whilst over here you KNOW that 90% of road users have no idea you're even behind them!
But back to the original topic, and a question that now springs to mind. Assuming equal conditions and neglecting arbitrary speed limits, how can me driving 140 in Germany be acceptable, whilst in the UK it is considered dangerous driving?
Cheers
Graham
I was paying attention, being conscious of speed differentials, and being considerate by pulling over when faster traffic approached. I certainly didn't feel that I was behaving in a manner that could be construed as irresponsible and warranted locking up for my heinous crimes. In fact had I been in the TVR I would have certainly been driving faster! As it was, the Hertz luxo-barge I had was flat out so wouldn't go any faster anyway. Sadly my motoring Nirvana ended all too soon with my arrival at the airport, subsequent departure from Germany and arrival back in sad little England.
Now I wouldn't dream of driving at those speeds on most UK roads (particularly witnessing the standards of driving on the M27/A31 tonight!), but this thread got me wondering why (laws notwithstanding).
I believe the major reasons are; lack of observation, poor lane discipline and lack of spatial awareness by most UK drivers. You feel that the typical German autobahn user knows you are approaching, and reacts accordingly, whilst over here you KNOW that 90% of road users have no idea you're even behind them!
But back to the original topic, and a question that now springs to mind. Assuming equal conditions and neglecting arbitrary speed limits, how can me driving 140 in Germany be acceptable, whilst in the UK it is considered dangerous driving?
Cheers
Graham
Whether we like it or not the law is still the law. I love driving fast, but if I get caught doing 45 in a 40 or 145 in a 40. I expect to get punished, if the BiB lets me off..Great!! I wouldnt expect to rob a bank and get let off just because I only demanded £10.
In answer to the very first question, I was caught last year doing 129.1mph on the new A130. I got a 2 month ban and £200 fine..Great!!
>> Edited by elms on Saturday 7th June 08:30
In answer to the very first question, I was caught last year doing 129.1mph on the new A130. I got a 2 month ban and £200 fine..Great!!
>> Edited by elms on Saturday 7th June 08:30
Joined this late but just wanted to make an observation. People (and I mean in general, not just on this board) need to remind themselves that the Police are tasked with implementing the law. They don't make the law, and they woudn't be doing their jobs if they didn't do what they are required to do. Anger at Police is anger misplaced. The people we all need to target our anger at are those that legislate, not the poor buggers who are left to pick up the pieces.
That misses the point entirely. they are meant to be implementing every law, not just those that involve motorists. However, everyone knows that there is not enough resource to go round. Nobody thinks that the Police make the laws, but individual Police forces decide how to prioritise their resources, and a lot of people think they are getting it badly wrong. I certainly do.
steve-p said: That misses the point entirely. they are meant to be implementing every law, not just those that involve motorists. However, everyone knows that there is not enough resource to go round. Nobody thinks that the Police make the laws, but individual Police forces decide how to prioritise their resources, and a lot of people think they are getting it badly wrong. I certainly do.
But they are not. The focus is on preventing and solving the priorities of burglary, car theft and robbery which is centred around drugs.
If there was a mechanical method which could cheaply and easily be introduced to deal with these offences, then it would be.
Dealing with offenders for burglary etc requires a large number of man hours and lots of human resources for even just one offence and one offender.
Major crime such as murder, rape, terrorism, serious assault and serious fraud etc requires even more technical and human resources to find the purpetrators.
Thankfully not too many people are badly injured or killed through theft, burglary fraud etc but many are affect so by the use of motor vehicles. Motorvehicles that travel fast cause most damage when there is a coming together.
Proportionally, more people are injured and killed on roads due to mistakes made by drivers and or other road users than ever will be by serious crime.
The best way to try to reduce that number is to educate people into slowing down so they have more time to react and do less damage when the collide. Talking to people does not work as some may listen but decide to disregard that advice, others will decide not to listen.
Automatic methods using technical equipment is not labour intensive and also generates the cash to provide more insentives to slow people down.
£60 and 3 points is not much of an insentive. If the points were increased to a much higher level and the fines to extortionate proportions, then the majority of people would slow down dramatically and would therefore not kill each other so often.
Civilianising enforcement allows resources that would otherwise be deployed in trying to reduce speeds in areas where conflict is more likely to be deployed in the main priorities of serious crime and general nuisance matters.
If everybody did their bit by adhering to the limits, then the financial resources put into safety measures could be devolved into other detection areas.
Some hope of that eh?
madcop said:
Dealing with offenders for burglary etc requires a large number of man hours and lots of human resources for even just one offence and one offender.
Major crime such as murder, rape, terrorism, serious assault and serious fraud etc requires even more technical and human resources to find the purpetrators.
Now, this is where we have to respectfully agree to strongly disagree.
My position is that we have the lowest number of recorded road deaths and casualties since records began. The figures are lower than when horses and carts were still the most common means of transport. The figures reduce year on year, thanks mainly to improvements in car safety, road design and materials technology. The figures decrease despite the steady increase in the many billions of vehicle miles that are travelled each year.
I believe that the law of diminishing returns has already applied, and that in order to speed up the decrease in these figures, the average motorist gets crapped on more and more. While we would all like the figures to be zero, they never will be. We all have a duty to drive responsibly, and I submit that compared to the population as a whole, people on this forum are more likely to do that than the average motorist, regardless of whether or not they might be breaking the posted limit. That is one reason why they resent the whole speed camera mentalility.
At the same time, I absolutely do not accept that even one burglary, rape, murder, serious assault etc is acceptable in a civilised society. It certainly isn't acceptable to ignore any of these at the expense of motoring enforcement (apart from breathalysing of course, which is very important).
Neither do I believe that allowing a million motorists to drive uninsured, in no doubt illegal vehicles, is in any way acceptable. It is extremely hard for me personally to take seriously any Police statement on the seriousness of speeding, when we all see daily the effect that a reduction of Police patrol cars is having on every other kind of traffic law. Cameras are better indiscriminate revenue generators than Policeman of course, who, in my experience, are very able to apply discretion when they are actually allowed to. On a daily basis, we see people jumping red lights, overtaking on chevrons, overtaking on double white lines, tailgating, and what is done about all this? Nothing. People do it because they can get away with it. The chances of getting caught by a patrol car are pretty near zero. All this is potentially far more serious than exceeding some notional limit. And yet, because it can't be captured on camera, it is a problem that apparently can't be solved.
What has also become clear recently (last week or the week before in the Sunday Times) is that after years of protesting that Police officers will never have 'quotas' of tickets to fill, Thames Valley does in fact have such a system in place now.
madcop said:
If everybody did their bit by adhering to the limits, then the financial resources put into safety measures could be devolved into other detection areas.
Some hope of that eh?
Probably not, because many councils now routinely set speed limits which directly contravene the DoT guidelines, often for political reasons, or, as is the case round here, because the roads just happen to pass councillors houses. Once upon a time, an experienced driver could be 95% sure of the limit by just examining the sight lines, number of streetlamps, road surface, entrances, houses etc. Now, that is not possible.
The entire public is supposed to have been brainwashed by the empty 'Speed Kills' publicity, but it really isn't that simple. Bad driving kills, often helped by a quantity of alcohol. Breaking a posted limit is not necessarily dangerous. If it isn't dangerous, why is it so serious. If it is, then prosecute everyone with a speeding ticket for dangerous driving, and lets see how that one flies. Almost all of them will be thrown out of court.
andygo said: I cando 70 mph in my Dell Boy reliant in pouring rain, force 97 wind and be legal. Same conditions, Micheal Schumacher, 78 mph in a Ferrari, Porsche, Scooby etc. and lose my licence.
Fantastic.
Spot on. This is the sad reality of law enforcement: obey to the letter, don't get nicked even if it is *dangerous*. Hey, but you won't catch the "Del boys" getting upset about it eh?
C
steve-p said:
madcop said:
Dealing with offenders for burglary etc requires a large number of man hours and lots of human resources for even just one offence and one offender.
Major crime such as murder, rape, terrorism, serious assault and serious fraud etc requires even more technical and human resources to find the purpetrators.
Now, this is where we have to respectfully agree to strongly disagree.
So you are saying that it does not take a lot of man hours to successfully prosecute a burglar and minutes to prosecute a speeder?
Are you saying burglars and such offenders kill and injure more people in the UK than motorcars? I think you will find both of these statements are in fact untrue.
My position is that we have the lowest number of recorded road deaths and casualties since records began.
You are probably right but they are still much higher than the proportion of criminal injuries.
We all have a duty to drive responsibly, and I submit that compared to the population as a whole, people on this forum are more likely to do that than the average motorist,
And there lies the problem, PH members verses the rest of the 30 million drivers on the road. Not a very big percentage comparison
regardless of whether or not they might be breaking the posted limit. That is one reason why they resent the whole speed camera mentalility.
They resent the speed camera mentality because there is much more chance of being caught exceeding the limit than if there were none.
At the same time, I absolutely do not accept that even one burglary, rape, murder, serious assault etc is acceptable in a civilised society.
You are absolutely right, but this society is not civilised, even though most of us like to think that we live in a civilised society, when you scratch the surface and look through the veneer, it is not at all.
It certainly isn't acceptable to ignore any of these at the expense of motoring enforcement (apart from breathalysing of course, which is very important).
And the Police do not do so. They have a small seperate division within the FPT department which is run mainly by civilians that look after machines.
The 'Police' put very large numbers of resources, both human and technical into catching those that commit serious crime. It is a major priority which is taken seriously, just as much as the thrust against drink driving.
Neither do I believe that allowing a million motorists to drive uninsured, in no doubt illegal vehicles, is in any way acceptable.
And it is not. Dealing with offenders with no insurance requires then to be stopped whilst driving or found when their vehicle is parked on a public road.
With 30 million drivers, there are just not enough Police officers to facilitate the number of stops to check every drivers insurance.
It is a bit easier now as the National Insurance data base is linked into PNC. A check of a vehicle on PNC will reveal whether insurance is valid at that time.
On a daily basis, we see people jumping red lights, overtaking on chevrons, overtaking on double white lines, tailgating, and what is done about all this? Nothing.
Big assumption there then SteveIts just not so immotive and therefore no one bothers to make a song and dance about it.
People do it because they can get away with it. The chances of getting caught by a patrol car are pretty near zero.
Which is why most decent people don't like cameras because they do catch them and regularly.
All this is potentially far more serious than exceeding some notional limit. And yet, because it can't be captured on camera, it is a problem that apparently can't be solved.
It could be solved but that would mean much higher taxes and much more draconian measures against motorists and so a chicken and egg situation would arise.
What has also become clear recently (last week or the week before in the Sunday Times) is that after years of protesting that Police officers will never have 'quotas' of tickets to fill, Thames Valley does in fact have such a system in place now.
I have been a Police Officer for over 22 years. I have always had quotas. I have not been on the traffic Division for nearly 9 years now. When I started on Traffic back in 1983, I had targets. Then it was to process at least 20 motorists per 4 weeks. To fail to do so was to put your position on the department at risk. It has just become topical in the press for political ends and therefore publicised at great length.
QUOTAS in the police are nothing new
madcop said:
If everybody did their bit by adhering to the limits, then the financial resources put into safety measures could be devolved into other detection areas.
Some hope of that eh?
The entire public is supposed to have been brainwashed by the empty 'Speed Kills' publicity, but it really isn't that simple. Bad driving kills,
And bad driving at faster levels is more likely to do so than at slower levels.
often helped by a quantity of alcohol.
Not always the case either.
Breaking a posted limit is not necessarily dangerous. If it isn't dangerous, why is it so serious.
Because of the potential for it to be so if something goes wrong, i.e. someone pulls out in front of the faster driver.
If it is, then prosecute everyone with a speeding ticket for dangerous driving, and lets see how that one flies. Almost all of them will be thrown out of court.
Because speeding alone is not necessarily dangerous. Throw something else into the equation at the same time and it may well be. That does not necessarily mean that the speeding driver has to throw something into the equation him/herself, it 'could' be someone else who is entirely within the law at the point the speeder is in their vicinity.
>> Edited by madcop on Monday 9th June 07:04
madcop said:
Because speeding alone is not necessarily dangerous. Throw something else into the equation at the same time and it may well be. That does not necessarily mean that the speeding driver has to throw something into the equation him/herself, it 'could' be someone else who is entirely within the law at the point the speeder is in their vicinity.
And yet, there is little or no difference in the punishment meted out to those who choose to drive fast through traffic, and someone who has deliberately sought out a long stretch of open road where he can *see* that THERE ARE NO OTHER CARS, pedestrians, horseriders, junctions, dips in the road etc and wound it out in top.
As a responsible enthusiast this is exactly how I choose to get my kicks on occasion. 5am sunday morning, sun coming up, a secluded and open section of dead straight dual carriageway . . . 180mph indicated. And I survived. And I do the same thing, down the same bit of road, every month or so. I didn't kill anyone, nor did I upset anyone, because there was noone within a mile radius to kill or upset. And I defy anyone to tell me that I shouldn't do it again, or that I was putting any innocent civilians in danger. At every moment I could easily see the road far enough ahead of me to stop in the distance I knew to be clear.
And yet, should I have been caught by a helicopter or a laser operator in camouflage gear or something, I would have been facing the same penalties as someone who had chosen to max out their Porsche round the M25 on a friday evening or something. All those precautions I had taken to find the right bit of the road for the job would have been dismissed in a second by a magistrate who would see a big number on his "score sheet" and instantly assume that I was a menace to society.
An extreme case, but one which illustrates the idiotic simple-mindedness of "69 is good, 71 is bad" as a road safety tool in the constantly varying conditions on our highways. These PHers saying "140, theres no excuse" or "it's never gonna be safe" are obviously driving fast in the wrong places or at the wrong times. Assuming your car is mecahnically competent at those speeds it is simply a case of finding a spot where no one is around to make a mistake which could affect you. Judging the danger a motorist presents to other road users by simply taking account of his speed is idiotically naive, it is but one part of the jigsaw of the road environment at the time.
aww999 said:Judging the danger a motorist presents to other road users by simply taking account of his speed is idiotically naive, it is but one part of the jigsaw of the road environment at the time.
But to judge the entire environment, in every case, fairly, is a nigh upon impossible task; especially with the sheer number of drivers caught.
As MC has said, this is simply an issue of resources. A full assessment cannot be done.
I agree it's an annoyance that no account is taken, but it's something that we can't do anything about.
aww999 said: Judging the danger a motorist presents to other road users by simply taking account of his speed is idiotically naive, it is but one part of the jigsaw of the road environment at the time.
Just like the majority of those that would take advantage of using this type of speed in exactly the wrong places
You just have to accept that the majority of drivers even if they command high salaries and drive expensive cars, are not blessed with the amount of restraint and common sense that would make this sort of driving remotely acceptable.
Jigsaw
there are many pieces missing from many drivers whole picture! >> Edited by madcop on Monday 9th June 17:59
madcop said:
aww999 said: Judging the danger a motorist presents to other road users by simply taking account of his speed is idiotically naive, it is but one part of the jigsaw of the road environment at the time.
Just like the majority of those that would take advantage of using this type of speed in exactly the wrong places
You just have to accept that the majority of drivers even if they command high salaries and drive expensive cars, are not blessed with the amount of restraint and common sense that would make this sort of driving remotely acceptable.
>> Edited by madcop on Monday 9th June 17:59
There is no incentive for the majority of drivers to develop their driving to make this type of driving acceptable.
A huge amount of effort has gone into pushing the "Speed Kills" message to the general public, the downside is that huge numbers of people now feel safe driving at or below the speed limit.
As drivers feel (blindly) safer by just slowing down, they no longer feel the need to work on their observation and all the other things that would make them a safe driver.
Driving a car at any useful speed is a potentially dangerous activity - the focus on speeding dumbs this message down and encourages bad driving.
I find it unacceptable that the only solution is to accept that most people will drive badly and force them to drive slowly to minimise injuries. It would be infinitely better to start to give responsibility for management of risk back to the individual motorist and encourage them to develop their driving skills to handle this responsibility.
I am stunned by the difference in driver behaviour exhibited by British drivers in Europe and at home. Almost invariably many of the bad habits, observation, lane discipline, tail gating, etc are forgotten when they are forced to think about their driving.
It is depressing to follow the same vehicles off the ferry at Dover and see them set off nose to tail in the fast lane blindly staring at their speedometers and radar detectors.
I may be foolish but I do believe that most members of the public are blessed with enough restraint and common sense to do the right thing in a suitable environment. I do not accept that it is possible to reduce the risks associated with driving by enforcing legislation aimed at controlling driver behaviour.
Miraz
>> Edited by Miraz on Monday 9th June 20:21
trev r said: So the punishment for being caught doing 140 mph in this country is up to a year in jail. How can this be justified when doing the same speed on a German autobahn isn't even an offence? Are Germans safer drivers?
No they aren't. And the vast majority of accidents happen in built-up areas at comparatively low speeds, not on motorways or wide-open A roads. Which is why I think I've managed to keep a clean licence so far - I do 30mph in 30 limits, 40mph in 40 limits and take my chances on clear sections of motorway and A road when I know the road. Speed legislation on these roads is not about safety, it is about political expedience.
If I do get caught doing some of the speeds I occasionally do on these roads I'll be in big trouble, and I'll be upset. But I will only blame myself, because more than likely the very fact that I have been caught will prove that my powers of observation aren't what I believe them to be, and that I'm not travelling at an appropriate speed.
I know the risks, I know the penalties, I take it on the chin if I get caught.
All this doesn't change the fact that I passionately believe that the law is an ass and must change. However, I still reserve my ire for law makers and not enforcers.
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff