Discussion
Bit disappointed with the BIB this weekend. I was wafting through Cambridgeshire when I passed a dark blue volvo in very light traffic. He fell in behind me so I eased up as I always do when I notice a suspect unmarked. I continued at about low 80s. Anyhow he followed for miles and inevitably the hidden lights came on so I stopped.
He was a decent bloke (appart from openening the conversation by giving me an FP for 94 in a 70). We chatted about the Porsche, his T5, traffic police etc and I ventured to see if he had any advice about my driving having followed me for that long, and he said it was courteous and safe and no problem at all, the only problem he had was with the speed.
Now my understanding is that you bibs take a rational approach, but in my case there was no suggestion of bad or dangerous driving, just of speeding. And it wasn't exactly taking the pee either at 94 I wouldn't have thought.
Do you think he saw me approaching at apparently much > 94 and decided to follow to see what he could get me for but just had to settle at 94? Or would he have mentioned that when we chatted?
Be interested in hearing views...
SM
He was a decent bloke (appart from openening the conversation by giving me an FP for 94 in a 70). We chatted about the Porsche, his T5, traffic police etc and I ventured to see if he had any advice about my driving having followed me for that long, and he said it was courteous and safe and no problem at all, the only problem he had was with the speed.
Now my understanding is that you bibs take a rational approach, but in my case there was no suggestion of bad or dangerous driving, just of speeding. And it wasn't exactly taking the pee either at 94 I wouldn't have thought.
Do you think he saw me approaching at apparently much > 94 and decided to follow to see what he could get me for but just had to settle at 94? Or would he have mentioned that when we chatted?
Be interested in hearing views...
SM
vonhosen said:Totally irrelevant - the officer agreed the driving was safe - irrelevant except to the law and the law on vehicle speed is an ass.
With a margin like 24mph+ over the limit the likely outcome was always going to be what you got. I'm surprsied really that you expected anything else, the margin over the limit was not samll after all.
turbobloke said:
With a margin like 24mph+ over the limit the likely outcome was always going to be what you got. I'm surprsied really that you expected anything else, the margin over the limit was not samll after all.
You want discretion used by a Police officer & you got it.
Speed limits were never written to punish dangerous driving, Sec2 RTA was.
Where your margin over the limit is 30-40% or more, then the likely outcome where stopped, is that you are going to get at least an FPN.
Cameras or not, that is not likely to change, we are not talking a blip.
>> Edited by vonhosen on Sunday 23 April 19:35
supermono said:
Do you think he saw me approaching at apparently much > 94 and decided to follow to see what he could get me for but just had to settle at 94? Or would he have mentioned that when we chatted?
If you were going above 94 he probably did clock you. My understanding is that 25 over the limit and its court appearance time - which most cops can't be arsed with. So they write it down as 94 and just give you a ticket.
vonhosen said:Which is why I criticised the daft law the officer was implementing and not the officer.
With a margin like 24mph+ over the limit the likely outcome was always going to be what you got. I'm surprsied really that you expected anything else, the margin over the limit was not samll after all.
You want discretion used by a Police officer & you got it.
turbobloke said:
He was nice to you - he only gave you a fixed penalty.
is aimed at the stooopid system, not you for pointing out the sordid truth of the matter.
It is utterly ludicrous, but also very true.
Unfortunately, this system has become so skewed that you can drive like an absolute idiot leaving a trail of destruction behind you ... just so long as you don't speed!
J1mmyD said:
He was nice to you - he only gave you a fixed penalty.
is aimed at the stooopid system, not you for pointing out the sordid truth of the matter.
It is utterly ludicrous, but also very true.
Unfortunately, this system has become so skewed that you can drive like an absolute idiot leaving a trail of destruction behind you ... just so long as you don't speed!
If you are observed by Police driving like an absolute idiot expect to be dealt with.
If you are breaking the speed limit by 30-40% or more expect to be dealt with.
Just because the Police don't observe someone driving like an idiot doesn't mean that it is considered acceptable & wouldn't be dealt with where observed.
>> Edited by vonhosen on Sunday 23 April 20:10
vonhosen said:No not always, which is why discretion is a good thing and more trafpol is a good thing and gatsoscamerati are a very bad thing. They have no positive safety benefit, it's all regression to the mean statistical lies.
If you are breaking the speed limit by 30-40% or more expect to be dealt.
Vonhosen ... I have absolutely no problem with the police dealing with this type of driving. I've no problem with the police pulling a driver for 'excessive speed'. I have no problem with the police in general.
What I do have a problem with is the fact that it seems the few police we have left are being stretched further and replaced by cameras dealing only with speeding offences and Traffic Officers picking up the pieces of vehicles for whatever reason they're in pieces.
As I said above, the officer involved was 'nice' about it. Don't expect motorists to enjoy being fined, but we do appreciate a 'fair cop'.
If you drive along in a garish volvo with blue lights all over it (even if you HIDE in a garish volvo with blue lights all over it) and you catch me infringing the speed regulations, that's fine - sort of.
But while we have to cope with cameras hiding in laybys, behind corners and on bridges rather than investment in our Services who's going to be there to stop the pr*ck on the M1 who did a good half mile on the hard shoulder to get 30 yards ahead of traffic then trying the same trick a few more miles down the road? He was only doing 70 ... so that can't have been dangerous.
The worst thing I see on the road isn't speeding, but DANGEROUS driving. Sometimes that dangerous driving has an element of excessive speed (but the thing is, what I consider excessive speed might not be above the speed limit).
Don't think that I'm having a go at you, or anyone else. It's Sunday ... I'm quitting smoking (again) and I need to rant. This seemed as good a place as any.
What I do have a problem with is the fact that it seems the few police we have left are being stretched further and replaced by cameras dealing only with speeding offences and Traffic Officers picking up the pieces of vehicles for whatever reason they're in pieces.
As I said above, the officer involved was 'nice' about it. Don't expect motorists to enjoy being fined, but we do appreciate a 'fair cop'.
If you drive along in a garish volvo with blue lights all over it (even if you HIDE in a garish volvo with blue lights all over it) and you catch me infringing the speed regulations, that's fine - sort of.
But while we have to cope with cameras hiding in laybys, behind corners and on bridges rather than investment in our Services who's going to be there to stop the pr*ck on the M1 who did a good half mile on the hard shoulder to get 30 yards ahead of traffic then trying the same trick a few more miles down the road? He was only doing 70 ... so that can't have been dangerous.
The worst thing I see on the road isn't speeding, but DANGEROUS driving. Sometimes that dangerous driving has an element of excessive speed (but the thing is, what I consider excessive speed might not be above the speed limit).
Don't think that I'm having a go at you, or anyone else. It's Sunday ... I'm quitting smoking (again) and I need to rant. This seemed as good a place as any.
J1mmyD said:
Vonhosen ... I have absolutely no problem with the police dealing with this type of driving. I've no problem with the police pulling a driver for 'excessive speed'. I have no problem with the police in general.
What I do have a problem with is the fact that it seems the few police we have left are being stretched further and replaced by cameras dealing only with speeding offences and Traffic Officers picking up the pieces of vehicles for whatever reason they're in pieces.
As I said above, the officer involved was 'nice' about it. Don't expect motorists to enjoy being fined, but we do appreciate a 'fair cop'.
If you drive along in a garish volvo with blue lights all over it (even if you HIDE in a garish volvo with blue lights all over it) and you catch me infringing the speed regulations, that's fine - sort of.
But while we have to cope with cameras hiding in laybys, behind corners and on bridges rather than investment in our Services who's going to be there to stop the pr*ck on the M1 who did a good half mile on the hard shoulder to get 30 yards ahead of traffic then trying the same trick a few more miles down the road? He was only doing 70 ... so that can't have been dangerous.
The worst thing I see on the road isn't speeding, but DANGEROUS driving. Sometimes that dangerous driving has an element of excessive speed (but the thing is, what I consider excessive speed might not be above the speed limit).
Don't think that I'm having a go at you, or anyone else. It's Sunday ... I'm quitting smoking (again) and I need to rant. This seemed as good a place as any.
I have no argument & agree with you that where the Police see two people breaking the law & one is dangerous, they should deal with the dangerous offender as a priority.
But where they just see one & they are flagrantly breaking the law, then just expect to be brought to book (that's all I'm saying)
7db said:Yes and due to the ever larger number of daft limits and the daft way they get enforced, it might just crop up again
which is why I criticised the daft law the officer was implementing and not the officer.
The daft law being that you shall not drive above the posted speed limit?
Haven't we done this one before...?!
vonhosen said:
With a margin like 24mph+ over the limit the likely outcome was always going to be what you got. I'm surprsied really that you expected anything else, the margin over the limit was not samll after all.
There was no complaint about the quality of driving, it was "courteous and safe".
Can it possibly be right to criminalise behaviour which is "courteous and safe"?
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff