New Speeding fine proposal
Discussion
Streetcop said:
Have we had this already?
Anyway..if not...here's what is proposed:
What a load of old rubbish.
I note with very great interest that the old standard of up to 96 mph on a 70 mph road would only get you 3 points (ACPO guidelines) is now changed to a larger fine at a lower limit.
What planet are these folks on ?
Further, am I correct in assuming that over 100 mph is still an automatic charge of dangerous driving ?
96 mph is paint drying speed, IMHO.
The principle of making the punishment proportionate to the crime seems reasonable. Just a shame that the 'crime' is exceeding an arbitrary speed limit, not causing excessive danger. Is it dangerous to drive at 51 mph in a 50 limit? Is it safe to drive at 49 mph? Based only on the numbers, it's impossible to say.
6 points and £100 for 94mph?????
ILMAO
Looks like the public is not bending over far enough .. accepting the current situation can only make it worse - classic schoolboy bully tactics.
If it's safety they want, I've got an idea for saving British lives.. don't send people to Iraq to get shot at.
I remember the early racing drivers - before James Hunt tried to make it a little safer. After numerous crashes and the huge danger surrounding the whole event they were asked "don't you think it's rather dangerous?". "No it's actually very safe" they said, "no one is shooting at us or trying to kill us here".
ILMAO
Looks like the public is not bending over far enough .. accepting the current situation can only make it worse - classic schoolboy bully tactics.
If it's safety they want, I've got an idea for saving British lives.. don't send people to Iraq to get shot at.
I remember the early racing drivers - before James Hunt tried to make it a little safer. After numerous crashes and the huge danger surrounding the whole event they were asked "don't you think it's rather dangerous?". "No it's actually very safe" they said, "no one is shooting at us or trying to kill us here".
GreenV8S said:
The principle of making the punishment proportionate to the crime seems reasonable. Just a shame that the 'crime' is exceeding an arbitrary speed limit, not causing excessive danger. Is it dangerous to drive at 51 mph in a 50 limit? Is it safe to drive at 49 mph? Based only on the numbers, it's impossible to say.
Excellent reply.
MoJo.
Streetcop said:
Have we had this already?
Anyway..if not...here's what is proposed:
This is total bollocks. The worst pandering to numpties I have ever heard.
It makes driving at normal motorway cruising speed perfectly safely automaticaly attract higher fines and more points. But SchoolyMumsy would never drive that fast oh no cos it scares her...oooh yes.
And it "forgives" SchoolyMumsy for straying over the 30 limit to virtually 40mph near the school with youngsters and pedestrians about (when did you last see them playing on the motorway) because she's a bit fluffy wuffy and not very good at judging speed..
Exactly the wrong way round. And the statistics bear this out - our motorways are the safest roads and most accidents happen in 30mph limits.
WHAT BRAINLESS TWIT THOUGHT THIS WAS A GOOD IDEA?
The brainless twit would be a government statistical analyser.
Lies, damned lies, and statistics.
When they get their heads out from up their butts and realise speed doesn't kill, crashing through bad driving kills, so get all the bad drivers sorted out.
Oh, hang on, that would take effort and money.
Order yet more Gatso's and hairdryers then.
Muppets.
Lies, damned lies, and statistics.
When they get their heads out from up their butts and realise speed doesn't kill, crashing through bad driving kills, so get all the bad drivers sorted out.
Oh, hang on, that would take effort and money.
Order yet more Gatso's and hairdryers then.
Muppets.
Don said:
Have we had this already?
Anyway..if not...here's what is proposed:
This is total bollocks. The worst pandering to numpties I have ever heard.
It makes driving at normal motorway cruising speed perfectly safely automaticaly attract higher fines and more points. But SchoolyMumsy would never drive that fast oh no cos it scares her...oooh yes.
And it "forgives" SchoolyMumsy for straying over the 30 limit to virtually 40mph near the school with youngsters and pedestrians about (when did you last see them playing on the motorway) because she's a bit fluffy wuffy and not very good at judging speed..
Exactly the wrong way round. And the statistics bear this out - our motorways are the safest roads and most accidents happen in 30mph limits.
WHAT BRAINLESS TWIT THOUGHT THIS WAS A GOOD IDEA?
So is that all you have to say on the subject Don?
The brainless twit will have been working for public enemy number 1 Professor David Begg Chair of the Commission for integrated
wittery. (similar to the Spanish inquisition) 
Streetcop said:
Have we had this already?
Yes but always good to discuss again.
In short it is Labour spin - introduced to make the system "fairer" so that a little over doesn't attract as large a penalty. Since the decline of educational standards this will of course be swallowed lock stock and two smoking barrels by the joe public.
It is in fact an increase in penalties, seeing significantly more people on points and fine revenue signifcant increasing.
The reason for this is the difference between reality and the law. In reality the proposed "2pts" speed attract zero points now. It also extends fixed fines eg 6pts to speeds previously going to court and attracting 4,5, and 6pts.
You have to remember stated European policy and hence ours is to remove people from cars by any means necessary
>> Edited by bluepolarbear on Sunday 6th February 11:36
very worrying, esp with the proposed banning of detectors. Seems like the "hidden" agenda is nearly ready for unveiling. We are in big trouble folkes, if apparently safe roads can be policing like this, while residential area limits can be exceeded by such a big percentage?
I thought "thirty means thirty" was ok - assuming it was in a hazardous/busy environment. To frig around with the motorway/nsl limits like this is madness.
I thought "thirty means thirty" was ok - assuming it was in a hazardous/busy environment. To frig around with the motorway/nsl limits like this is madness.
Streetcop said:
Have we had this already?
Anyway..if not...here's what is proposed:
Spot what is missing. The lower limit. I seem to recall this is going down - so the initial band disappears.
I would bet £££ that someone has done a spreadsheet on this and figured out that it probably will increase revenue.
I'd agree. If the lower band was not a fine & points but a "bollocking from a trafpol".
>> Edited by autismuk on Sunday 6th February 14:35
Streetcop said:
Keep it blue..
Do you really think it will make any difference?
Remind me again which government introduced speed cameras. Remind me which government introduced the fuel tax escalator. Labour took these ideas and milked them to death.
If the Tories get in again, what's the next bright idea they'll give to a subsequent Labour lot?
Also, don't forget that we (as a nation) didn't vote the current government in. We voted out the most corrupt, self-serving, sleaze-ridden government in living memory.
And what do we have 8 years later? The most corrupt, self-serving, etc, etc.
'King Deadly said:
Keep it blue..
Do you really think it will make any difference?
Yes.
The tories are against cameras (for the time being)...by the time they get rid of them and are about to reintroduce them..there will be another election and we can vote someone else in.
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff