96mph on A65 - 1.40am!
Discussion
middle of nowhere, cruising nice and quietly with not one other car in sight..... nice man with his laser gun clocks me at 96mph.
they pull me (as i only had a short burst then slowed back down to 50mph!) and say ' here's a ticket..', the other copper decides it should be court.
he says I can probably expect 3 points and £200 fine, does that sound accurate? does the court take time of day and conditions into account?
cheers for your help!
they pull me (as i only had a short burst then slowed back down to 50mph!) and say ' here's a ticket..', the other copper decides it should be court.
he says I can probably expect 3 points and £200 fine, does that sound accurate? does the court take time of day and conditions into account?
cheers for your help!
This one turns on whether you think no-one else around, so 'no offence,' or it is, by defintion, unsafe to you, and potentially to others, to drive at 96 on any road.
A Scottish friend was done for just that - no one around but unsafe - but when he later did the same in England, he was let off with a caution.
The IAM says drive at a speed appropriate to the circumstances - not to do so is dangerous - this concept is central to the system of car control.
We don't know enough here, but it could be argued that the time of day and lack of other vehicles were only two factors among many other possibles. A dog could run out (I hit an alsatian at 70 in a Volvo and it nearly killed me and my son) - a child could run out - another motorist could misjudge your speed and pull out in front of you - you sneeze violently.
Such considerations are not fanciful - things happen.
And the argument, e.g. that I have a Porsche with carbon brakes that can stop the car in 10 inches, does not wash. Being in the position in the first place where you have to brake so hard is what is wrong.
What do you guys think??
A Scottish friend was done for just that - no one around but unsafe - but when he later did the same in England, he was let off with a caution.
The IAM says drive at a speed appropriate to the circumstances - not to do so is dangerous - this concept is central to the system of car control.
We don't know enough here, but it could be argued that the time of day and lack of other vehicles were only two factors among many other possibles. A dog could run out (I hit an alsatian at 70 in a Volvo and it nearly killed me and my son) - a child could run out - another motorist could misjudge your speed and pull out in front of you - you sneeze violently.
Such considerations are not fanciful - things happen.
And the argument, e.g. that I have a Porsche with carbon brakes that can stop the car in 10 inches, does not wash. Being in the position in the first place where you have to brake so hard is what is wrong.
What do you guys think??
[quote=xylophone]This one turns on whether you think no-one else around, so 'no offence,' or it is, by defintion, unsafe to you, and potentially to others, to drive at 96 on any road.
A Scottish friend was done for just that - no one around but unsafe - but when he later did the same in England, he was let off with a caution.
The IAM says drive at a speed appropriate to the circumstances - not to do so is dangerous - this concept is central to the system of car control.
We don't know enough here, but it could be argued that the time of day and lack of other vehicles were only two factors among many other possibles. A dog could run out (I hit an alsatian at 70 in a Volvo and it nearly killed me and my son) - a child could run out - another motorist could misjudge your speed and pull out in front of you - you sneeze violently.
Such considerations are not fanciful - things happen.
And the argument, e.g. that I have a Porsche with carbon brakes that can stop the car in 10 inches, does not wash. Being in the position in the first place where you have to brake so hard is what is wrong.
What do you guys think??[/quote
depends whos driving it m8.
if you have to brak hard you aint observing the road.
96 aint unsafe simple as that.
A Scottish friend was done for just that - no one around but unsafe - but when he later did the same in England, he was let off with a caution.
The IAM says drive at a speed appropriate to the circumstances - not to do so is dangerous - this concept is central to the system of car control.
We don't know enough here, but it could be argued that the time of day and lack of other vehicles were only two factors among many other possibles. A dog could run out (I hit an alsatian at 70 in a Volvo and it nearly killed me and my son) - a child could run out - another motorist could misjudge your speed and pull out in front of you - you sneeze violently.
Such considerations are not fanciful - things happen.
And the argument, e.g. that I have a Porsche with carbon brakes that can stop the car in 10 inches, does not wash. Being in the position in the first place where you have to brake so hard is what is wrong.
What do you guys think??[/quote
depends whos driving it m8.
if you have to brak hard you aint observing the road.
96 aint unsafe simple as that.
xylophone said:
This one turns on whether you think no-one else around, so 'no offence,' or it is, by defintion, unsafe to you, and potentially to others, to drive at 96 on any road.
A Scottish friend was done for just that - no one around but unsafe - but when he later did the same in England, he was let off with a caution.
The IAM says drive at a speed appropriate to the circumstances - not to do so is dangerous - this concept is central to the system of car control.
We don't know enough here, but it could be argued that the time of day and lack of other vehicles were only two factors among many other possibles. A dog could run out (I hit an alsatian at 70 in a Volvo and it nearly killed me and my son) - a child could run out - another motorist could misjudge your speed and pull out in front of you - you sneeze violently.
Such considerations are not fanciful - things happen.
And the argument, e.g. that I have a Porsche with carbon brakes that can stop the car in 10 inches, does not wash. Being in the position in the first place where you have to brake so hard is what is wrong.
What do you guys think??
I think you are abolutely right. There are different standards of driving, and different competencies. Sometimes people drive beyond their training or ability (not a jibe at anyone in person) We all like to give it some welly when we can. But unfortunately unforseen circumstances cannot be accounted for. (Hence your escape in the volvo).
My driver trainer used to say "Just remember, everyday, is bin day"......After chewing it over for a bit thought it was excellent advice, and in other words, the road ahead may look clear, but there may be a hoofing bin lorry stationary just around the corner...I suppose it could apply to "big hairy yak type animal just round the corner on dartmoor, etc etc"
Outlaw says 96 not unsafe, end of story. Silverback and I are what might be called 'safe' drivers - no disprfespect to Outlaw: I have no knowledge of his driving.
But a serious question to Outlaw, if I may - have you had a serious car accident - has someone you love, or know had one?
But a serious question to Outlaw, if I may - have you had a serious car accident - has someone you love, or know had one?
I suggest you read this thread is you think that sort of speed is safe on an A road at any time of day or night
www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?t=52267&f=23&h=0
www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?t=52267&f=23&h=0
I understand that having a 'serious' accident changes the way you think about how you drive, who you drive with or if you believe the speed limits are appropriate, and I respect that. I think you have fairly pointed out the crux of many arguements on PH.
To give you an example I don't consume ANY alcohol before driving and never have. Coloured by my time as a casualty officer attending alcohol RTA's round M25 and Helicopter body bags.
But I don't smoke either because I deal with the effects on people/friends/family daily. Mostly to tell people of my experiences doesn't stop them smoking, which may be why the initial reply to your post sounded hostile.
But, and this is the killer, I don't want to live in a country where the state thinks it has the right to protect people from themselves. I don't think making smoking illegal, or criminalizing speeding should be within the power of the government.
I'm quiet happy to have a motorised BIB make a valued judgement about my driving. Because in the main they're stand up good people who respect the power they have. And if he thinks I'm hazarding other people I'm happy to have him stop/fine/lock me up. What I'm less happy about is the idea that I get that judgement from a machine, or a BIB who thinks like a machine and would stop someone on an empty motorway at 1am, to protect them from themselves.
To give you an example I don't consume ANY alcohol before driving and never have. Coloured by my time as a casualty officer attending alcohol RTA's round M25 and Helicopter body bags.
But I don't smoke either because I deal with the effects on people/friends/family daily. Mostly to tell people of my experiences doesn't stop them smoking, which may be why the initial reply to your post sounded hostile.
But, and this is the killer, I don't want to live in a country where the state thinks it has the right to protect people from themselves. I don't think making smoking illegal, or criminalizing speeding should be within the power of the government.
I'm quiet happy to have a motorised BIB make a valued judgement about my driving. Because in the main they're stand up good people who respect the power they have. And if he thinks I'm hazarding other people I'm happy to have him stop/fine/lock me up. What I'm less happy about is the idea that I get that judgement from a machine, or a BIB who thinks like a machine and would stop someone on an empty motorway at 1am, to protect them from themselves.
I see your point Julian.
However, it depends on personal discretion whether a motorist is stopped, whether at 0140 or 0700 0r anytime for that matter.
Personally I do take into account the time of day, conditions etc.
I hope you weren't inferring that I think like a machine, I most certainly don't and most people I stop, have a good chat, and if prosecution is necessary so be it.
However, a chat about the why's wherefore, offence (if applicable) and the car (if interesting) and respectful banter either way is the most important thing.
Yes, prosecution has to be brought about sometimes, there would be no point in having a Police force (sorry service. I must be pc I must be pc
)if all rules were ignored.
However it is a delicate balance whereby rules are adhered to, but other things taken into account.
Onto the link provided prior to my post, I have lost count of the RTA'S I have attended, a lot being fatals.
Unfortunately a lot of these are misjudged driving, and error.
Im not on a soapbox, far from it, nobody is perfect, and everyone likes a good rant on a good road, however, I am always aware that there may be an obstruction just around the corner.
Mike.
However, it depends on personal discretion whether a motorist is stopped, whether at 0140 or 0700 0r anytime for that matter.
Personally I do take into account the time of day, conditions etc.
I hope you weren't inferring that I think like a machine, I most certainly don't and most people I stop, have a good chat, and if prosecution is necessary so be it.
However, a chat about the why's wherefore, offence (if applicable) and the car (if interesting) and respectful banter either way is the most important thing.
Yes, prosecution has to be brought about sometimes, there would be no point in having a Police force (sorry service. I must be pc I must be pc
)if all rules were ignored. However it is a delicate balance whereby rules are adhered to, but other things taken into account.
Onto the link provided prior to my post, I have lost count of the RTA'S I have attended, a lot being fatals.
Unfortunately a lot of these are misjudged driving, and error.
Im not on a soapbox, far from it, nobody is perfect, and everyone likes a good rant on a good road, however, I am always aware that there may be an obstruction just around the corner.
Mike.
Nope not inferring you think like a machine or you wouldn't bother with this list. But the BIB at the side of the road has a short time to make a serious point to the motorist.
I think most of the time that point gets lost while the driver thinks about the telephone number of his solicitor, questions your motives and doesn't believe he should be treated like a criminal. If its a camera, thats already wasted.
I'm afraid to say I don't have an answer to this and not afraid to admit it. I do think zero tollerance means zero respect. And I suppose the compromise is somewhere between me and xylophone with you picking up the pieces.
I think most of the time that point gets lost while the driver thinks about the telephone number of his solicitor, questions your motives and doesn't believe he should be treated like a criminal. If its a camera, thats already wasted.
I'm afraid to say I don't have an answer to this and not afraid to admit it. I do think zero tollerance means zero respect. And I suppose the compromise is somewhere between me and xylophone with you picking up the pieces.
they pulled me over and they did everything on their car bonnet, they also didn't tell me the time of offence (but at the time I didn't realise and signed the little bit of paper anyway!) - aren't they supposed to do all this in the back of the car?
i'm a local guy and know the road as i've driven it thousands of times before, so I know all the immediate hazards around - it all depends on the police around here, some will just give a boll**king, others feel the need to catch everything on wheels..
i'm a local guy and know the road as i've driven it thousands of times before, so I know all the immediate hazards around - it all depends on the police around here, some will just give a boll**king, others feel the need to catch everything on wheels..
Julian, I do agree with you and concur your points.
Yorks, seems you were treated a little harshly, or to put it a different way, I probably would have dealt with it differently. I know it doesn't help you now though.
When it goes to court, raise the issues you have now, good legal advice, and, you never know.
Mike.
Yorks, seems you were treated a little harshly, or to put it a different way, I probably would have dealt with it differently. I know it doesn't help you now though.
When it goes to court, raise the issues you have now, good legal advice, and, you never know.
Mike.
superb discussion.....Ive managed to agree entirely with Xylophone, Mike and Julian on this one......
I think, what it comes down to for people like us (motoring enthusiasts who take driving very seriously) is that WE feel we're better able than most to do things like 'speed at 1:40am' - and in a lot of cases it will be true.
Sadly though, no-one can predict everything that will happen (remember the time they landed a 737 on the M1?!!) and rules have to be made for both the lowest common denominator of driver (like the people on Britains worst driver), AND for unexpected occurrences.
Personally I dont think any of these people should be on our roads, but for some reason the powers that be seem more than happy to let any half-blind, slow-witted muppet have a license, and then everyone gets penalised with rules as a result......
Night
I think, what it comes down to for people like us (motoring enthusiasts who take driving very seriously) is that WE feel we're better able than most to do things like 'speed at 1:40am' - and in a lot of cases it will be true.
Sadly though, no-one can predict everything that will happen (remember the time they landed a 737 on the M1?!!) and rules have to be made for both the lowest common denominator of driver (like the people on Britains worst driver), AND for unexpected occurrences.
Personally I dont think any of these people should be on our roads, but for some reason the powers that be seem more than happy to let any half-blind, slow-witted muppet have a license, and then everyone gets penalised with rules as a result......
Night
tonyrec said:
Come on guys, be fair to the cops. What else do you expect them to be doing at 1.40 am? It's not as if any burglars would have been operating at that time of the day, surely.
Who knows, it could have been Burglars speeding away from their crime.
It has been known.
only the dumb ones.
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff