Speeding Camera got me :-( Advice please.
Discussion
OK, 1st time so don't understand much about it, but 70 in a 60 on M4 Variable Speed Limit - Automatic Camera.....HADECS3 pics, jt 19-20 up around Bristol, Eastbound.
Empty on Saturday afternoon....but I'm guessing no point in arguing ?
WORKSHOP: applying for this, as hope doesn't impact AVIVA policy for my 5 cars, is that right ?
Blimey, 70 in a 60, ho hum.
Thanks, Big Ant.
Empty on Saturday afternoon....but I'm guessing no point in arguing ?
WORKSHOP: applying for this, as hope doesn't impact AVIVA policy for my 5 cars, is that right ?
Blimey, 70 in a 60, ho hum.
Thanks, Big Ant.
NordicCrankShaft said:
The M4 in general is turning into a right ball ache.
I’d agree with that! It’s the only road on which I’ve been caught speeding in 30 years of driving, although that was by a police car, not a static camera. Is it just me, or are Wiltshire plod much more active on speed enforcement than other forces?DELETED: Comment made by a member who's account has been deleted.
There was a motorcyclist that died near me doing 66 in a 30 then hit a car. I reckon he might have lived of he was going 30. And also do you think if he had hit a pedestrian at 66 or 30 which one gives the pedestrian a better chance? Of course you have all the facts and figures the police don't have so you must be correct.Road2Ruin said:
There was a motorcyclist that died near me doing 66 in a 30 then hit a car. I reckon he might have lived of he was going 30. And also do you think if he had hit a pedestrian at 66 or 30 which one gives the pedestrian a better chance? Of course you have all the facts and figures the police don't have so you must be correct.
So there we go. Hitting things on a motorcycle kills. You heard it here first. I wonder why nobody else has ever realised this.OP - you've been charged with one number being bigger than another. No more, no less. 70 is bigger than 60. Bang to rights. Trivial penalty, or an afternoon of tea and biccies with no penalty - that reflects the seriousness. You've not been charged with dangerous driving. I presume you made a conscious choice to drive at 70 through a 60-signed bit of road...? That's the gamble you chose. And you'd presumably prefer several thousand similar offences not to be taken into consideration, right?
DELETED: Comment made by a member who's account has been deleted.
Of course it kills. I have just explained it to you. If you hit someone doing 30 then there is a good chance they will live. Of you hit them faster than that then their chance of living decreases. I am confused...are you trying to suggest that's wrong? If you are then sorry hand your driving licence in now..TooMany2cvs said:
So there we go. Hitting things on a motorcycle kills. You heard it here first. I wonder why nobody else has ever realised this.
OP - you've been charged with one number being bigger than another. No more, no less. 70 is bigger than 60. Bang to rights. You've not been charged with dangerous driving. I presume you made a conscious choice to drive at 70 through a 60-signed bit of road...? That's the gamble you chose. And you'd presumably prefer several thousand similar offences not to be taken into consideration, right?
Tin RobotOP - you've been charged with one number being bigger than another. No more, no less. 70 is bigger than 60. Bang to rights. You've not been charged with dangerous driving. I presume you made a conscious choice to drive at 70 through a 60-signed bit of road...? That's the gamble you chose. And you'd presumably prefer several thousand similar offences not to be taken into consideration, right?
There is actually TWO!!!
I just wonder how 2CV can drive with the glow from his frigging Halo blinding him
silverfoxcc said:
TooMany2cvs said:
So there we go. Hitting things on a motorcycle kills. You heard it here first. I wonder why nobody else has ever realised this.
OP - you've been charged with one number being bigger than another. No more, no less. 70 is bigger than 60. Bang to rights. You've not been charged with dangerous driving. I presume you made a conscious choice to drive at 70 through a 60-signed bit of road...? That's the gamble you chose. And you'd presumably prefer several thousand similar offences not to be taken into consideration, right?
Tin RobotOP - you've been charged with one number being bigger than another. No more, no less. 70 is bigger than 60. Bang to rights. You've not been charged with dangerous driving. I presume you made a conscious choice to drive at 70 through a 60-signed bit of road...? That's the gamble you chose. And you'd presumably prefer several thousand similar offences not to be taken into consideration, right?
There is actually TWO!!!
I just wonder how 2CV can drive with the glow from his frigging Halo blinding him
Let me be a bit clearer...
1. Road2Ruin is a disingenuous nugget.
2. It's a speeding ticket, ffs, nothing serious.
3. Did it come as a surprise that driving at 70 down a variable-limit bit of motorway showing 60 resulted in a photo? It shouldn't.
4. We all do it regularly, in the full knowledge that we're doing something that could result in a photo or a chat. Weigh the risk up and decide for yourself, and don't whinge if you occasionally lose the gamble.
Edited by TooMany2cvs on Sunday 8th July 09:29
Road2Ruin said:
Alway one. :rollseyes:
I suggest driving at no more than 20 mph then. Go on. In fact, why not have a man walk in front of you with a flag?
Speed in of itself doesn't kill. If you can't grasp this simple concept you shouldn't be on the road.
DELETED: Comment made by a member who''s account has been deleted.I suggest driving at no more than 20 mph then. Go on. In fact, why not have a man walk in front of you with a flag?
Speed in of itself doesn't kill. If you can't grasp this simple concept you shouldn't be on the road.
The problem r2r, is not speed, it is that the minority of us have to share the world with lots of people who are not intelligent or capable enough to be allowed on the public roads. If they make a mistake and die, that's natural selection at work. Unfortunately their stupidity and incompetence often take out the competent.
So it's not speed, it's morons we have to put up with.
HTH, though I doubt it.
Road2Ruin said:
There was a motorcyclist that died near me doing 66 in a 30 then hit a car. I reckon he might have lived of he was going 30. And also do you think if he had hit a pedestrian at 66 or 30 which one gives the pedestrian a better chance? Of course you have all the facts and figures the police don't have so you must be correct.
DELETED: Comment made by a member who''s account has been deleted. Inappropriate speeds for the conditions may lead to situations where you are at higher risks of injuring or killing yourself or others.
Motorcyclist who does over double the speed limit in a built up area is simply a candidate for a Darwin Award. A motorist doing a bit over the limit on a clear motorway in good conditions is no danger to anyone and shouldn’t be penalised.
Take a trip on the M25 where everyone religiously (mostly) sticks to the limit on pain of death (of a ticket
). Standards of driving are abysmal as people get in lane and stick to it come hell or high water and concentration on what’s ahead is nonexistent as boredom creeps in and guess what? There’s still a f
k tonne of accidents. Speed is not to blame, st driving is.Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff