Driver using laser jammer banned.
Discussion
14-7 said:
Hedders said:
If by 'offender' you mean someone that has been prosecuted for doing a perfectly safe 46 in a 40, then you can see why they have lost faith.
Those that have not yet been prosecuted in this way probably do not feel the same way. Everytime it happens though, 'you' lose the support of one more person that is now classed as 'an offender'.
If your view is that easily skewed then I would expect the police do not want someone like yourself supporting them.Those that have not yet been prosecuted in this way probably do not feel the same way. Everytime it happens though, 'you' lose the support of one more person that is now classed as 'an offender'.
Enforcing arbitrary laws to no good purpose is no way to maintain the support of the public who are the sole justification for the police's existence.
14-7 said:
I have been caught for speeding (and banned). I do not resent the police one bit nor the officers that stopped me. I knew what I was doing and the possible outcome. I got caught.
You have kinda bought into the deal.I too have been caught speeding, but only after being on the brakes long enough to avoid a ban.
I'd sack them, and the ones that got you, all the same.
as one who has used lasers in my past job i suggest.,, coating your car in crinkly tin foil and only driving on rainy days. The specular effect of the laser light bouncing all over the place would never give a true reading. Its the same principle of trying to blow a bridge up with a paveway laser guided missle that crosses a river and you miss :-)
vonhosen said:
... you are offending if you ... have 1.5mm tyre tread depth on a bright dry summer day.
All together now, "Oh, no, you're not!"1) For cars, light vans, etc., 25% of the tyre can have a tread depth of 1.5mm or less.
2) For HGVs and vehicles designed to carry more than eight seated passengers, a tread depth of 1.0mm is legal.
3) For motorcycles above 50cc, a tread depth of 1.0mm is perfectly legal ... albeit, bl00dy stupid!
It's uncommon for you to mis-state, vh.
It beats me why a moped should be required to have a greater depth of tread (to remain legal) than a Ducati Desmosedici RR, or a bus with a carrying capacity of 83 passengers be legally driven with 0.6mm less tread than a Messerschmitt Kabinenroller.
Streaky
In all instances above, the minimum tread depth must be achieved over 75% of the central area of the breadth of the tread and all around the circumference (excluding tread wear indicators.)
streaky said:
vonhosen said:
... you are offending if you ... have 1.5mm tyre tread depth on a bright dry summer day.
All together now, "Oh, no, you're not!"1) For cars, light vans, etc., 25% of the tyre can have a tread depth of 1.5mm or less.
2) For HGVs and vehicles designed to carry more than eight seated passengers, a tread depth of 1.0mm is legal.
3) For motorcycles above 50cc, a tread depth of 1.0mm is perfectly legal ... albeit, bl00dy stupid!
It's uncommon for you to mis-state, vh.
It beats me why a moped should be required to have a greater depth of tread (to remain legal) than a Ducati Desmosedici RR, or a bus with a carrying capacity of 83 passengers be legally driven with 0.6mm less tread than a Messerschmitt Kabinenroller.
Streaky
In all instances above, the minimum tread depth must be achieved over 75% of the central area of the breadth of the tread and all around the circumference (excluding tread wear indicators.)
I didn't go into the minor detail of every offence I mentioned because it was not necessary to get the point across. If I was going to do chapter & verse for the tyre tread depth, I'd have to do the same for seatbelts & speed limits.
You choose to ignore a lot of detail for tyres & all the detail for seatbelts/speed limits, so your point is ????
& you incorrectly stated that in 'all the above circumstances' that the minimum tread depth must be achieved over 75% of the 'central area' of the breadth of the tread all around the circumference.
Edited by vonhosen on Thursday 28th October 06:58
vonhosen said:
streaky said:
vonhosen said:
... you are offending if you ... have 1.5mm tyre tread depth on a bright dry summer day.
All together now, "Oh, no, you're not!"1) For cars, light vans, etc., 25% of the tyre can have a tread depth of 1.5mm or less.
2) For HGVs and vehicles designed to carry more than eight seated passengers, a tread depth of 1.0mm is legal.
3) For motorcycles above 50cc, a tread depth of 1.0mm is perfectly legal ... albeit, bl00dy stupid!
It's uncommon for you to mis-state, vh.
It beats me why a moped should be required to have a greater depth of tread (to remain legal) than a Ducati Desmosedici RR, or a bus with a carrying capacity of 83 passengers be legally driven with 0.6mm less tread than a Messerschmitt Kabinenroller.
Streaky
In all instances above, the minimum tread depth must be achieved over 75% of the central area of the breadth of the tread and all around the circumference (excluding tread wear indicators.)
I didn't go into the minor detail of every offence I mentioned because it was not necessary to get the point across. If I was going to do chapter & verse for the tyre tread depth, I'd have to do the same for seatbelts & speed limits.
You choose to ignore a lot of detail for tyres & all the detail for seatbelts/speed limits, so your point is ????
streaky said:
vonhosen said:
streaky said:
vonhosen said:
... you are offending if you ... have 1.5mm tyre tread depth on a bright dry summer day.
All together now, "Oh, no, you're not!"1) For cars, light vans, etc., 25% of the tyre can have a tread depth of 1.5mm or less.
2) For HGVs and vehicles designed to carry more than eight seated passengers, a tread depth of 1.0mm is legal.
3) For motorcycles above 50cc, a tread depth of 1.0mm is perfectly legal ... albeit, bl00dy stupid!
It's uncommon for you to mis-state, vh.
It beats me why a moped should be required to have a greater depth of tread (to remain legal) than a Ducati Desmosedici RR, or a bus with a carrying capacity of 83 passengers be legally driven with 0.6mm less tread than a Messerschmitt Kabinenroller.
Streaky
In all instances above, the minimum tread depth must be achieved over 75% of the central area of the breadth of the tread and all around the circumference (excluding tread wear indicators.)
I didn't go into the minor detail of every offence I mentioned because it was not necessary to get the point across. If I was going to do chapter & verse for the tyre tread depth, I'd have to do the same for seatbelts & speed limits.
You choose to ignore a lot of detail for tyres & all the detail for seatbelts/speed limits, so your point is ????
Mr_annie_vxr said:
If you are physically incapable of being unable to keep to limits you shouldn't have a licence.
You're saying that if you lack the driving skill to be capable of controlling your speed within a few mph, you shouldn't be operating a motor vehicle? In that case, most would agree.That of course would be different from whether you drive above a given speed limit.
TheRoadWarrior said:
The thing I dont understand about these devices is why do people think jamming a speed camera will stop them from getting in trouble?? What are the chances the officer will be like 'hurrmm, no speed reading.. thats unusual..... oh well, back to my tea"
They're gonna pull you over and start asking questions as evidenced by Mr Eady !!
No they are not, I have tested an LTI 2020, and from the 10 cars I tried, about 4 did not provide readings for whatever reason. Perhaps me shaking too much or anything else, but not getting a reading is very normal.They're gonna pull you over and start asking questions as evidenced by Mr Eady !!
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff