56mph in a 30mph zone...
Discussion
nonsequitur said:
popeyewhite said:
nonsequitur said:
popeyewhite said:
nonsequitur said:
They don't drive to THE conditions, but to their interpretation of them.
Do you mean they should drive to someone else's interpretation of THE conditions?nonsequitur said:
Joeguard1990 said:
Recently just been to court for 106mph on a 70mph motorway.
Represented myself and got 6 points and a £700 ish fine.
If your current license is clean i'd expect similar or worst case a short ban.
You smooth talker Joe. Normally it's a ban for anything north of a ton.Represented myself and got 6 points and a £700 ish fine.
If your current license is clean i'd expect similar or worst case a short ban.
Few years ago, I was driving back from a game of tennis (I lost) along a stretch of road with a 40 limit, with nothing either side (as in no schools, shops, buildings, people, animals etc - just grass verge) and no traffic whatsoever. I accelerated and at the end was a cop with a speed gun.
Needless to say I had managed to clock up 88 - I was baffled but also apologetic. So whilst he berated me and I looked at my shoes, he also said that as I had insurance and MOT and seemed like a half decent human being, he would let me off with a small fine and 3 points only. He also said they are generally looking for people with no insurance, MOT, soul.
I considered myself very lucky. Even the lady at the station was surprised I hadn't managed to get a court hearing/poss ban.
I think the key is be honest, don't be a d*ck and always approach them (don't wait for them to come to the window). Plus I joked about going back in time hence the 88 miles an hour. So maybe tell a joke too if you can!
Needless to say I had managed to clock up 88 - I was baffled but also apologetic. So whilst he berated me and I looked at my shoes, he also said that as I had insurance and MOT and seemed like a half decent human being, he would let me off with a small fine and 3 points only. He also said they are generally looking for people with no insurance, MOT, soul.
I considered myself very lucky. Even the lady at the station was surprised I hadn't managed to get a court hearing/poss ban.
I think the key is be honest, don't be a d*ck and always approach them (don't wait for them to come to the window). Plus I joked about going back in time hence the 88 miles an hour. So maybe tell a joke too if you can!
M666 EVO said:
I think the key is be honest, don't be a d*ck and always approach them (don't wait for them to come to the window). Plus I joked about going back in time hence the 88 miles an hour. So maybe tell a joke too if you can!
All fine in theory except you can't have a conversation with a camera and nowadays you're far more likely to get a NIP from one of those than you are from a traffic officer.....popeyewhite said:
They collate public opinion over time. That is not what you posted.
Correct, my post never once mentioned collating public opinion over time...."Unfortunately as long there are people who attempt to defend or justify excessive speed then the local authorities will continue to invest in more cameras."
My LA does invest in speed cameras as a direct result of public pressure, the timeline associated with those decisions is unknown and also irrelevant in the context of my original post. Their locations are also determined by feedback from the public which change daily.
JNW1 said:
Then never was the wrong word to use! I suspect what you meant was that you always try to respect the 30mph limit (which is fair enough, I try to do the same) but that's rather different from saying you've never exceeded it! 
Agreed, it was meant in the context you described it.TooMany2cvs said:
How about non-residential 30s, and residential NSLs?
There was a recent thread that bore some similarities to this one...https://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?h=0&...
There was some discussions about 'perceived risk' and how some people used them to make their own judgement on what speed is appropriate regardless of the posted speed limit.
Several examples were posted of residential and rural 30mph limits which affected those perceived risks.
I can only comment on the environments I have driven through and all I can say is that I've yet to come across a situation which I would determine to justify exceeding a 30mph limit. That's not to say they aren't out there, just I haven't found any.
silver1011 said:
There was a recent thread that bore some similarities to this one...
https://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?h=0&...
There was some discussions about 'perceived risk' and how some people used them to make their own judgement on what speed is appropriate regardless of the posted speed limit.
Several examples were posted of residential and rural 30mph limits which affected those perceived risks.
I can only comment on the environments I have driven through and all I can say is that I've yet to come across a situation which I would determine to justify exceeding a 30mph limit. That's not to say they aren't out there, just I haven't found any.
It is probably a good thing that you obey the 30s thenhttps://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?h=0&...
There was some discussions about 'perceived risk' and how some people used them to make their own judgement on what speed is appropriate regardless of the posted speed limit.
Several examples were posted of residential and rural 30mph limits which affected those perceived risks.
I can only comment on the environments I have driven through and all I can say is that I've yet to come across a situation which I would determine to justify exceeding a 30mph limit. That's not to say they aren't out there, just I haven't found any.
Sorry (and you know I disagree with you)..Ignore the limits question for the moment, but do you agree that a fundamental driving skill is being able to drive safely and not hit anything? To paraphrase, drive at a speed where you are able to stop in the distance you can see to be clear and is likely to remain so.
Bert
Bert
silver1011 said:
And there lies a large part of the issue, an individuals own assessment of their own driving ability combined with their own ability to accurately perceive all possible risks from behind the wheel.
popeyewhite said:
Thanks anyway, but you know very well I was referring to another quote.
I'd appreciate you keeping my quotes in context if possible.
Jeez, its like the twilight zone. I literally have no idea which quote you are referring to. I went back a few pages and found my only post.I'd appreciate you keeping my quotes in context if possible.
Wouldn't it make life simpler if you actually quoted my quote if being kept in 'context' is so important to you?
BertBert said:
Sorry (and you know I disagree with you)..Ignore the limits question for the moment, but do you agree that a fundamental driving skill is being able to drive safely and not hit anything? To paraphrase, drive at a speed where you are able to stop in the distance you can see to be clear and is likely to remain so.
Bert
Hi Bert, yes, that's my ultimate goal.Bert
silver1011 said:
And there lies a large part of the issue, an individuals own assessment of their own driving ability combined with their own ability to accurately perceive all possible risks from behind the wheel.
The point I was trying to make was that you and I have to make a call on what speed is appropriate using only the information available to us at the time. The issue is that from behind the wheel it is impossible to identify all possible dangers.
Well then we should all drive around everywhere at 10mph right? No, but in built-up areas, which are usually residential, the ability for us to constantly monitor the surrounding area is diminished by the very nature of the environment itself. This is why the speed limit is often set to 30mph or less.
Increase the speed and our ability to identify risk diminishes further. If the risks involved scratched paint, dented prides etc. then fine, but for me the risks are hitting a human. This is why I'd rather be doing a speed which is at or below the limit.
I'm human, I make mistakes, everyone does, even those that think excessive speed in built-up areas is acceptable. Unfortunately there will always be other drivers that think they are better at driving than everyone else, and feel that because they haven't run anyone over then it must be true.
If my kids manage to escape a drivers assessment of risk then I'd rather that driver was doing 30mph or less than 40mph or more.
silver1011 said:
Jeez, its like the twilight zone. I literally have no idea which quote you are referring to. I went back a few pages and found my only post.
Wouldn't it make life simpler if you actually quoted my quote if being kept in 'context' is so important to you?
No it bloody wouldn't. The idea's simple - in order to write a reply directly to a post you quote it - not some random one 2 pages later.Wouldn't it make life simpler if you actually quoted my quote if being kept in 'context' is so important to you?
SteveS Cup said:
Am I likely to be looking at a ban or 6 points and a hefty fine? Does a letter from your employer stating my licence / ability to drive is key to my job / livelihood still hold some weight in court to sway a judge towards a bigger fine and no ban?
I got clocked doing 52 in a 30 (non residential dual carriageway) last year by trafpol. No b
king - just told me they couldn't deal with it by fixed penalty so I would receive a summons.Took legal advice, was advised to plead guilty by post. Got 6 points and £500 fine. popeyewhite said:
No it bloody wouldn't. The idea's simple - in order to write a reply directly to a post you quote it - not some random one 2 pages later.
Don't accuse me of taking you out of context then if you can't be arsed to hit the quote button before having a pop, it ain't rocket science!Several pointless posts later and I still have no idea what your beef is about.
I guess we are probably not in that much disagreement. It's just that I view the speed limit as a broad measure. It's not the precise thing you seem to be saying it is. You seem to be making a pejorative point around the "driver's assessment of risk as if it's of not value and trumped by the speed limit.
My view is that it is the other way around for any driver who is trying to be safe. Their assessment has to be more important as they have to be able to stop in time. Whether that speed is 10 mph or 35 mph or 135 mph.
Anyway I know you don't drive as you profess as you have already admitted to being a speeder like me
Bert
My view is that it is the other way around for any driver who is trying to be safe. Their assessment has to be more important as they have to be able to stop in time. Whether that speed is 10 mph or 35 mph or 135 mph.
Anyway I know you don't drive as you profess as you have already admitted to being a speeder like me
Bert
silver1011 said:
If my kids manage to escape a drivers assessment of risk then I'd rather that driver was doing 30mph or less than 40mph or more.
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff