Dual carriageway or no dual carriageway?

[mac96]

zarjaz1991 said:

mac96 said:

Given that this thread has been debated since last night (by people with an interest in the subject) without reaching agreement, it would seem grossly unfair to a random driver to penalise them for exceeding the speed limit, assuming their speed was under 70mph.
Surely should have 60mph signs if that is the intention. I am not saying 'according to regulation X, there should be a sign'- I am saying you can't expect anyone to know what the limit is otherwise.

Prosecuting people isn't about what's fair, it's about what will secure a conviction.

True- but there should be some link between the two!

[jamei303]

I suppose before exceeding 60mph you need to track down the local highways officer responsible for the work, if they're still alive, and ask them whether they installed the central area so as to separate a carriageway to be used by vehicles proceeding in one direction from a carriageway to be used by vehicles proceeding in the opposite direction, or whether they installed it to separate vehicles turning right and thus regarded it as an island.

If the latter, with their testimony safe in hand you can then be confident of doing an extra 10mph and covering the 500 metre section 2.5 seconds more quickly than if you'd not bothered to investigate the matter.

[syl]

I thought the burden of proof lay with the prosecution. The police/CPS would have to get that information, not the driver.

How would a driver know that it was a traffic island rather than a central reservation without the prior benefit of a satellite photo when driving along the road for the first time? We can’t even agree with one. It would be absurd to think they could and absurd to prosecute. If it were thought important then there should be 60 limit markers to avoid any ambiguity.