Eight months for using a laser jammer ?!! Wtf

[The Selfish Gene]

vonhosen said:

The Selfish Gene said:

why? Sat Nav starts at 6.5 hours - I do it in 4..........that's hours

I said if you are willing to exceed by massive margins you can make up time. I said 80 (what people keep calling for as a motorway limit) v 70 isn't going to make a great difference.

If I drive to Glasgow from London right now, that's about 390 miles & it's going to take me around 6.5hours according to the satnav (mostly but not exclusively motorway) at an average of 60mph on the journey.
You are going to have to average 97.5mph to do it in 4hours in the traffic right now.
Good luck with that average.

over that distance - its a challenge but do'able at the right time of day

I think 91.5 is very possible of 300 ish miles

[Greendubber]

cmaguire said:

ghe13rte said:

Greendubber said:

cmaguire said:

Greendubber said:

No ones putting cars in the catagory of offensive weapons. The point being made is that lot of offences are 'victimless' as far as no one person is a victim but technically the victim is 'Regina'

Much the same as PCOJ, which people referred to as a victimless crime (it may or may not have been you though)

Or it may not have been anybody, as my recollection has speeding cited as the victimless crime.

Which people have continually and wrongly suggested this is what the opening post was about. It's been pointed out over and over again that [b]the speeding is irrelevant,[/] yet people are moaning that this chap has been jailed for committing a 'vicimless crime' which isn't the case.

You are right, the speeding is irrelevant. The speed couldn't be measured so it is not known if he was or was not speeding.

He was perverting justice and I can't see how that fits the definition of a victimless crime. Maybe those who are saying it is don't know what one is.

Looks a bit like the authorities have manufactured their own criminal.

Not really, looks like someone just got caught fair and square to me.

[The Selfish Gene]

Greendubber said:

The Selfish Gene said:

why? Sat Nav starts at 6.5 hours - I do it in 4..........that's hours

You save hours on a 300 mile trip? How fast are you going?

hypothetically the maths would work out that the SatNav is rather conservative (say assuming 60mph) and in reality on a long enough clear run at 99, plus the odd higher spurt when safe to do so.......you could see an average laptime of 90 ish

[vonhosen]

The Selfish Gene said:

vonhosen said:

The Selfish Gene said:

why? Sat Nav starts at 6.5 hours - I do it in 4..........that's hours

I said if you are willing to exceed by massive margins you can make up time. I said 80 (what people keep calling for as a motorway limit) v 70 isn't going to make a great difference.

If I drive to Glasgow from London right now, that's about 390 miles & it's going to take me around 6.5hours according to the satnav (mostly but not exclusively motorway) at an average of 60mph on the journey.
You are going to have to average 97.5mph to do it in 4hours in the traffic right now.
Good luck with that average.

over that distance - its a challenge but do'able at the right time of day

I think 91.5 is very possible of 300 ish miles

To average 97.5 you are going to have to regularly be in considerable ban territory (in E&W) & possibly risk of dangerous driving (in Scotland).
Knock yourself out & stick it to the man.

[The Selfish Gene]

sorry 91.5 - 97.5 is significantly higher (not taking the piss it really is as an average)

It's not sticking it to anyone. It isn't about winning against authority.

It's simply about getting from A to B without wasting loads of time and being unnecessarily slowed.

Clearly if it's safe to do so.

So if you were transporting a heart to save a live from London to Edinburgh at 3am.........and had the correct level of training - and were responsible with any road users that you happened upon..........you'd be ok with that average wouldn't you?

[Greendubber]

The Selfish Gene said:

Greendubber said:

The Selfish Gene said:

why? Sat Nav starts at 6.5 hours - I do it in 4..........that's hours

You save hours on a 300 mile trip? How fast are you going?

hypothetically the maths would work out that the SatNav is rather conservative (say assuming 60mph) and in reality on a long enough clear run at 99, plus the odd higher spurt when safe to do so.......you could see an average laptime of 90 ish

The nav will estimate the journey based on the speed limits programmed into it, so motorway would be 70.

I think I'll stand by my previous assessment of your claims.

[vonhosen]

The Selfish Gene said:

sorry 91.5 - 97.5 is significantly higher (not taking the piss it really is as an average)

It's not sticking it to anyone. It isn't about winning against authority.

It's simply about getting from A to B without wasting loads of time and being unnecessarily slowed.

Clearly if it's safe to do so.

So if you were transporting a heart to save a live from London to Edinburgh at 3am.........and had the correct level of training - and were responsible with any road users that you happened upon..........you'd be ok with that average wouldn't you?

I'd be a greater risk doing so than if I weren't doing the speeds required to attain that average.
Of course if society (through parliament) decreed that it considered that extra risk equitable in view of the benefits it'd be legal. I fancy though they don't view it an equitable trade so that you can spend an extra bit of time with your mum.

[The Selfish Gene]

Greendubber said:

The Selfish Gene said:

Greendubber said:

The Selfish Gene said:

why? Sat Nav starts at 6.5 hours - I do it in 4..........that's hours

You save hours on a 300 mile trip? How fast are you going?

hypothetically the maths would work out that the SatNav is rather conservative (say assuming 60mph) and in reality on a long enough clear run at 99, plus the odd higher spurt when safe to do so.......you could see an average laptime of 90 ish

The nav will estimate the journey based on the speed limits programmed into it, so motorway would be 70.

I think I'll stand by my previous assessment of your claims.

sorry if it does not compute - well i'm not, at all but you know what I mean.

Satnavs compute based on perceived slow patches of traffic too - particularly if you use something like WAZE. So by the time you get there, it's often gone.

So the SatNav baseline probably isn't a good one (other than as a target that one must defeat)

So to do 300 miles at 70mph is about 4.2 hours in reality. Not the 6 that the SATNav gives as an opening gambit

If a person was able to average 90mph it would be about 3 hours 15 over 300 miles........so saving just over an hour in mathematical terms, but in reality it's much more than that as the 4.2 is often longer if you aren't engaged in the task.

[Greendubber]

The Selfish Gene said:

Greendubber said:

The Selfish Gene said:

Greendubber said:

The Selfish Gene said:

why? Sat Nav starts at 6.5 hours - I do it in 4..........that's hours

You save hours on a 300 mile trip? How fast are you going?

hypothetically the maths would work out that the SatNav is rather conservative (say assuming 60mph) and in reality on a long enough clear run at 99, plus the odd higher spurt when safe to do so.......you could see an average laptime of 90 ish

The nav will estimate the journey based on the speed limits programmed into it, so motorway would be 70.

I think I'll stand by my previous assessment of your claims.

sorry if it does not compute - well i'm not, at all but you know what I mean.

Satnavs compute based on perceived slow patches of traffic too - particularly if you use something like WAZE. So by the time you get there, it's often gone.

So the SatNav baseline probably isn't a good one (other than as a target that one must defeat)

So to do 300 miles at 70mph is about 4.2 hours in reality. Not the 6 that the SATNav gives as an opening gambit

If a person was able to average 90mph it would be about 3 hours 15 over 300 miles........so saving just over an hour in mathematical terms, but in reality it's much more than that as the 4.2 is often longer if you aren't engaged in the task.

All the very best with your 90mph average then

........haven't you seen the tax cameras everywhere?

[vonhosen]

Or the people overtaking at 71 in lane 3.

[The Selfish Gene]

yeah you see them in plenty of time - i'm not saying 200mph! :-)

to average 90 - you just really need to be above or around 90 (assuming you get to the motorway quickly or where you start your clock from)

it's hardly fast!!

[Greendubber]

vonhosen said:

Or the people overtaking at 71 in lane 3.

Or reduced limits on managed motorways, lane closures, road works, reality etc all getting in the way.

[vonhosen]

The Selfish Gene said:

yeah you see them in plenty of time - i'm not saying 200mph! :-)

to average 90 - you just really need to be above or around 90 (assuming you get to the motorway quickly or where you start your clock from)

it's hardly fast!!

To average 90 you are going to have to spend considerable time well above 90, because you are going to be spending considerable time well below it on our roads.

[Greendubber]

The Selfish Gene said:

yeah you see them in plenty of time - i'm not saying 200mph! :-)

to average 90 - you just really need to be above or around 90 (assuming you get to the motorway quickly or where you start your clock from)

it's hardly fast!!

Do you know about some secret empty roads that know one else is aware of?

I travel up the motorway to work every day, at unsocial out of hours times. In fact I did it this morning at 3am heading in and it was covered in cones and it was 50 all the way (fair enough there were blokes working on it) On my way home I was stuck in lane 3 behind people crawling past HGVs in L1 & L2 so zero chance of ever managing a 90mph average.

[rallycross]

The Selfish Gene said:

over that distance - its a challenge but do'able at the right time of day

I think 91.5 is very possible of 300 ish miles

Very difficult to do that here, even driving in the evening. OK you could pick one motorway service station to another and have all 300 miles on pure motorway but even then you'd have far too many slow moments to achieve that average.

I used to drive from Edinburgh to Surrey 5 or 6 times per month, one way, leaving Edinburgh once the traffic calms down after 630pm, the 425 miles was usually < 5.5 hours, but very very difficult to get it down to 5. So to average anything like 90+ you'd have to spend a lot of time well into 3 figures which would be silly/difficult etc.

[ElectricPics]

The Selfish Gene said:

sorry 91.5 - 97.5 is significantly higher (not taking the piss it really is as an average)

So if you were transporting a heart to save a live from London to Edinburgh at 3am.........and had the correct level of training - and were responsible with any road users that you happened upon..........you'd be ok with that average wouldn't you?

No-one is ok with that average transporting organs which is why they now go by air for long distances.

But even if they still went by road, you want to use that example to justify you saving some time?

[Phil Dicky]

Greendubber said:

The Selfish Gene said:

yeah you see them in plenty of time - i'm not saying 200mph! :-)

to average 90 - you just really need to be above or around 90 (assuming you get to the motorway quickly or where you start your clock from)

it's hardly fast!!

Do you know about some secret empty roads that know one else is aware of?

I travel up the motorway to work every day, at unsocial out of hours times. In fact I did it this morning at 3am heading in and it was covered in cones and it was 50 all the way (fair enough there were blokes working on it) On my way home I was stuck in lane 3 behind people crawling past HGVs in L1 & L2 so zero chance of ever managing a 90mph average.

The quiet roads at 3am just don't exist anymore, so averaging 90mph unless in the far north of Scotland just wont happen.

[ElectricPics]

Phil Dicky said:

Greendubber said:

The Selfish Gene said:

yeah you see them in plenty of time - i'm not saying 200mph! :-)

to average 90 - you just really need to be above or around 90 (assuming you get to the motorway quickly or where you start your clock from)

it's hardly fast!!

Do you know about some secret empty roads that know one else is aware of?

I travel up the motorway to work every day, at unsocial out of hours times. In fact I did it this morning at 3am heading in and it was covered in cones and it was 50 all the way (fair enough there were blokes working on it) On my way home I was stuck in lane 3 behind people crawling past HGVs in L1 & L2 so zero chance of ever managing a 90mph average.

The quiet roads at 3am just don't exist anymore, so averaging 90mph unless in the far north of Scotland just wont happen.

Exactly. Last time I did a 2am motorway run from London to Newcastle, lane one was full of trucks, lane two full of trucks travelling at 0.5mph faster than those in lane one, lane three full of frustrated car drivers trying to keep their average speed down in roadworks so although the trip was about 30 minutes quicker the only opportunity for a bit of foot down was on the A1M in North Yorks and Durham. I might have averaged around 70 if I was lucky. Since the massive rise in e-commerce there's been an exponential rise in the number of trucks operating trunking routes between courier hubs and depots.

[4rephill]

The Selfish Gene said:

........So if you were transporting a heart to save a live from London to Edinburgh at 3am.........and had the correct level of training - and were responsible with any road users that you happened upon..........you'd be ok with that average wouldn't you?.....

How could anyone be "ok" with that?

If it's a life saving organ needing to be transported from London to Edinburgh, what fugnugget would arrange for the organ to be transported by road when it would be far quicker to get it there by air?

[jm doc]

vonhosen said:

cmaguire said:

ghe13rte said:

Greendubber said:

cmaguire said:

Greendubber said:

No ones putting cars in the catagory of offensive weapons. The point being made is that lot of offences are 'victimless' as far as no one person is a victim but technically the victim is 'Regina'

Much the same as PCOJ, which people referred to as a victimless crime (it may or may not have been you though)

Or it may not have been anybody, as my recollection has speeding cited as the victimless crime.

Which people have continually and wrongly suggested this is what the opening post was about. It's been pointed out over and over again that [b]the speeding is irrelevant,[/] yet people are moaning that this chap has been jailed for committing a 'vicimless crime' which isn't the case.

You are right, the speeding is irrelevant. The speed couldn't be measured so it is not known if he was or was not speeding.

He was perverting justice and I can't see how that fits the definition of a victimless crime. Maybe those who are saying it is don't know what one is.

Looks a bit like the authorities have manufactured their own criminal.

Nope, the common law has been around a long long time, he just placed himself at odds with it. They didn't have to do anything but note that the circumstances breached that piece of law.

If he wasn't speeding how was he perverting the course of justice? Genuine question Von.