War on the motorist or media hype?

War on the motorist or media hype?

Author
Discussion

Funkycoldribena

7,379 posts

153 months

Tuesday 27th September 2016
quotequote all
schmunk said:
Why do people, (apparently) particularly on here, feel such an entitlement to break this law? Should we demand a leniency of Police enforcement of other laws? Drink driving? Fraud? Assault?

By all means break the law if you wish, but don't moan if you get caught and prosecuted.
There's more leniency in drink driving, blow a slightly over reading and you get another go down the police station. I don't remember the wife getting another go through the mobile camera when she got got done for speeding at 35 in a 30.

Mill Wheel

Original Poster:

6,149 posts

195 months

Tuesday 27th September 2016
quotequote all
schmunk said:
Why do people, (apparently) particularly on here, feel such an entitlement to break this law? Should we demand a leniency of Police enforcement of other laws? Drink driving? Fraud? Assault?

By all means break the law if you wish, but don't moan if you get caught and prosecuted.
Why do perpetrators of assault, fraud or drink driving not get offered courses except AFTER they have been to court?
Is it because speeding is not regarded as seriously, or they don't occur in great enough numbers to make a profit like speeding?

Sex offenders sometimes get courses AFTER court. Do they have to pay and somebody like AA DriveTech get a slice of the profits?

tannhauser

1,773 posts

214 months

Wednesday 28th September 2016
quotequote all
Funkycoldribena said:
schmunk said:
Why do people, (apparently) particularly on here, feel such an entitlement to break this law? Should we demand a leniency of Police enforcement of other laws? Drink driving? Fraud? Assault?

By all means break the law if you wish, but don't moan if you get caught and prosecuted.
There's more leniency in drink driving, blow a slightly over reading and you get another go down the police station. I don't remember the wife getting another go through the mobile camera when she got got done for speeding at 35 in a 30.
Indeed there is more leniency (not that I know from experience - only from what I understand!), which highlights how unfair "in the spirit of the law" this draconian and blinkered emphasis on speed (and speed alone) actually is - it's largely a case of being easy money, as others have alluded to. It stinks.

But equally ridiculous with drink driving is that the penalty for being slightly over, or many times over, are the exactly the same (if I understand rightly?) For me, it should range from a sizeable fine, to massive fine, to custodial; on a sliding scale related to seriousness.

schmunk

4,399 posts

124 months

Wednesday 28th September 2016
quotequote all
tannhauser said:
Indeed there is more leniency (not that I know from experience - only from what I understand!), which highlights how unfair "in the spirit of the law" this draconian and blinkered emphasis on speed (and speed alone) actually is - it's largely a case of being easy money, as others have alluded to. It stinks.
What would you say is the "spirit of the law" here?

Tannhauser said:
But equally ridiculous with drink driving is that the penalty for being slightly over, or many times over, are the exactly the same (if I understand rightly?) For me, it should range from a sizeable fine, to massive fine, to custodial; on a sliding scale related to seriousness.
There is a scale/range. Have you not seen the many and various "100+ in a 70" threads in SP&L?

Terminator X

14,921 posts

203 months

Wednesday 28th September 2016
quotequote all
schmunk said:
Why do people, (apparently) particularly on here, feel such an entitlement to break this law? Should we demand a leniency of Police enforcement of other laws? Drink driving? Fraud? Assault?

By all means break the law if you wish, but don't moan if you get caught and prosecuted.
The speed limits generally are silly low though in 2016 and need an overhaul, up not down btw! If a significant number of people are "speeding" then the limit is too low ffs.

TX.

JNW1

7,711 posts

193 months

Wednesday 28th September 2016
quotequote all
schmunk said:
Why do people, (apparently) particularly on here, feel such an entitlement to break this law? Should we demand a leniency of Police enforcement of other laws? Drink driving? Fraud? Assault?

By all means break the law if you wish, but don't moan if you get caught and prosecuted.
I don't disagree with that; it's everyone's right to break the law but if you do you have to accept the punishment that goes with it.

However, I think the point people are making is that the law itself is often a bit of an ass where speed limits are concerned and that the enforcement of at least some limits appears to have more to do with revenue raising than road safety. Where I live there's been a pronounced increase in the use of mobile camera vans and bikes over the last couple of years and sometimes they're deployed in locations where there have been accidents (which is fair enough); however, often they're deployed on safe stretches of road where it's all too easy in a modern car to (unintentionally) stray above a 60mph or 70mph limit. The motive for that sort of camera use looks more like pure revenue raising and hence I do think motorists are entitled to feel a touch aggrieved if they get flashed in that situation; surely the purpose of speed limits should be to protect road users rather than act as a form of taxation?

Moonhawk

10,730 posts

218 months

Wednesday 28th September 2016
quotequote all
Terminator X said:
The speed limits generally are silly low though in 2016 and need an overhaul, up not down btw! If a significant number of people are "speeding" then the limit is too low ffs.
Yep - even the governments own white paper on setting speed limits acknowledges this.

I do find it odd that despite the fact that speed enforcement is so much easier now and cars are much safer and much more stable at higher speeds than when our current speed limits were originally applied - speed limits have been reducing almost across the board, sometimes without any apparent justification.

Moonhawk

10,730 posts

218 months

Wednesday 28th September 2016
quotequote all
JNW1 said:
Where I live there's been a pronounced increase in the use of mobile camera vans and bikes over the last couple of years and sometimes they're deployed in locations where there have been accidents (which is fair enough); however, often they're deployed on safe stretches of road where it's all too easy in a modern car to (unintentionally) stray above a 60mph or 70mph limit. The motive for that sort of camera use looks more like pure revenue raising and hence I do think motorists are entitled to feel a touch aggrieved if they get flashed in that situation; surely the purpose of speed limits should be to protect road users rather than act as a form of taxation?
Similar story where I live.

Road had a 40mph limit on it when we moved in and it remained in force for a number of years (and by all accounts had been in force for decades). Straight wide road, good visibility, relatively few houses, no school etc. There has been no serious accident on this stretch of road in living memory.

One day the limit was reduced to 30 which IMO is far to slow for the road. I queried the country council as to why it had been reduced and asked what evidence they had gathered that lead to the reduction. Their reply was that they had assessed the 40 limit and deemed it appropriate for the road - but the parish council had pushed the limit reduction through against their recommendation.

Never saw a single mobile camera there when the limit was 40, yet ever since it was reduced to 30 - there has been a mobile camera van parked at the end of my lane at least once or twice a month. scratchchin





moreymach

1,029 posts

265 months

Wednesday 28th September 2016
quotequote all
I live near St Ives and following transforming of one busy road I use to 'one way' in order to accomodate a cycle path Ive started to take notice of the antics of Cornwall Council. I saw this article in the local rag recently and specifically this quote.

"Councillor Bert Biscoe, Cabinet member for transport, said: "We want to discourage people from owning motor cars. Our policies are about moving people into towns where they can live and work where they can rely on totally efficient public transport."

http://www.westbriton.co.uk/200-parking-permits-ar...

As someone who doesnt live in a town and enjoys motoring I cant help but feel the council doesnt like me or how I lead my life, a declaration of war you might say ?

JNW1

7,711 posts

193 months

Wednesday 28th September 2016
quotequote all
Moonhawk said:
I do find it odd that despite the fact that speed enforcement is so much easier now and cars are much safer and much more stable at higher speeds than when our current speed limits were originally applied - speed limits have been reducing almost across the board, sometimes without any apparent justification.
Only problem is the standard of driving hasn't improved and if anything seems to have got worse in some respects. For example, the ability to overtake seems to be a dying art and it's not unheard of to get flashed by other road users just for having the temerity to overtake; their attitude seems to be "I'm content to sit at 40mph in a 60mph limit and you should be happy to just sit there and follow me." Therefore, while I agree many of our speed limits are out of date - and many are policed to raise revenue rather than improve road safety - I can't see that changing any time soon; actually, I see it getting worse as it's surely only a matter of time before cameras on smart motorways are used to enforce National Speed Limits and not just temporary limits as and when they're displayed.....

Terminator X

14,921 posts

203 months

Wednesday 28th September 2016
quotequote all
^^ Hadecs3 allegedly doing that now.

TX.

tannhauser

1,773 posts

214 months

Wednesday 28th September 2016
quotequote all
schmunk said:
tannhauser said:
Indeed there is more leniency (not that I know from experience - only from what I understand!), which highlights how unfair "in the spirit of the law" this draconian and blinkered emphasis on speed (and speed alone) actually is - it's largely a case of being easy money, as others have alluded to. It stinks.
schmunk said:
What would you say is the "spirit of the law" here?
Common sense, flexibility and discretion - which coppers of old had, and speed cameras do not.

Tannhauser said:
But equally ridiculous with drink driving is that the penalty for being slightly over, or many times over, are the exactly the same (if I understand rightly?) For me, it should range from a sizeable fine, to massive fine, to custodial; on a sliding scale related to seriousness.
schmunk said:
There is a scale/range. Have you not seen the many and various "100+ in a 70" threads in SP&L?
Re-read my post FFS! I am referring to drink driving having no sliding scale!

JNW1

7,711 posts

193 months

Wednesday 28th September 2016
quotequote all
Terminator X said:
^^ Hadecs3 allegedly doing that now.

TX.
Obviously it's possible technically - and will be the thin end of a very nasty wedge once it starts - but I've not heard of anyone being prosecuted for exceeding the NSL as a result of being flashed by a camera on a smart motorway gantry; any particular stretches of road where you believe this is happening?

tannhauser

1,773 posts

214 months

Wednesday 28th September 2016
quotequote all
JNW1 said:
Terminator X said:
^^ Hadecs3 allegedly doing that now.

TX.
Obviously it's possible technically - and will be the thin end of a very nasty wedge once it starts - but I've not heard of anyone being prosecuted for exceeding the NSL as a result of being flashed by a camera on a smart motorway gantry; any particular stretches of road where you believe this is happening?
I think precisely this has been discussed of late, in SP&L?

Pothole

34,367 posts

281 months

Wednesday 28th September 2016
quotequote all
Mill Wheel said:
Take this headline from the Daily Mail:
Stop reading this drivel.

oyster

12,577 posts

247 months

Wednesday 28th September 2016
quotequote all
Matthen said:
Bit of both, but from my own point of view:

I've seen more new speedcameras in the last 6 months than I have in the previous 6 years. Equally, the number of Speedbumps, 20 limits and traffic lights in the local area has ballooned - case point, it took me nearly an hour to do a 4 miles yesterday primarily because half of the routes across town have been shut to motorcars to improve... something, and another quarter are temporarily closed whilst being "improved" - with very little signage warning of the closure ahead. The traffic lights don't help either; they spend so much time on red, and so little time on green, the main roads just sit stationary continually.

Why didn't you cycle, you may ask. Simply, its no better on a bike, you're just exposed to more pollution. The roads are still shut, the speedbumps are even more annoying than in the car and the traffic lights are still red. Any improvements cyclists would have received after the centre of town was closed to cars are non-existent, owing to the fact the buses still completely jam up the streets, with little care to other road users (now that there aren't any expensive cars to hit).

I wouldn't call it the war on the motorist. More the war on movement.
I think you're actually being serious?
Are you?

What do you think caused all the routes to be so congested? Wouldn't be people on their own in a car with capacity to seat 4/5 would it?

Hosenbugler

1,854 posts

101 months

Wednesday 28th September 2016
quotequote all
moreymach said:
I live near St Ives and following transforming of one busy road I use to 'one way' in order to accomodate a cycle path Ive started to take notice of the antics of Cornwall Council. I saw this article in the local rag recently and specifically this quote.

"Councillor Bert Biscoe, Cabinet member for transport, said: "We want to discourage people from owning motor cars. Our policies are about moving people into towns where they can live and work where they can rely on totally efficient public transport."

http://www.westbriton.co.uk/200-parking-permits-ar...

As someone who doesnt live in a town and enjoys motoring I cant help but feel the council doesnt like me or how I lead my life, a declaration of war you might say ?
Thats disgraceful, is the "councillor" in question a green blob looney?

Funkycoldribena

7,379 posts

153 months

Wednesday 28th September 2016
quotequote all
oyster said:
I think you're actually being serious?
Are you?

What do you think caused all the routes to be so congested? Wouldn't be people on their own in a car with capacity to seat 4/5 would it?
Wouldnt be bus lanes reducing road capacity then?

oyster

12,577 posts

247 months

Wednesday 28th September 2016
quotequote all
Boosted LS1 said:
The law is farcical, why shouldn't we break it when it's safe to do so?
Just be a man when you get caught.

I've been caught before and just accept my punishment.


Seeing all the threads on here about people trying to evade or mitigate punishment is embarrassing.

Funkycoldribena

7,379 posts

153 months

Wednesday 28th September 2016
quotequote all
Hosenbugler said:
Thats disgraceful, is the "councillor" in question a green blob looney?
How is it these plonkers always end up in authority?