30 in a 60 numpties - Human Rights issue?

[soulpatch]

Ok im not any kind of legal buff, but here goes - what do you guys / gals think of this...

The Human Rights Act is put in place in case the need of the individual comes above the need of the state to my knowledge. I remember reading somthing in it that states somthing along the lines of "You have the human right to enjoy your possesions without anyone else interfering or stopping this enjoyment / use within the confines of the law."

Now when you pass your driving test you basically sign a legal document stating that you are competant to drive your car within the law (ie within and up to the recommended speed limits).

So if you are driving along in a perfect straight or very slightly bendy 60MPH road for example, if there is a numpty in front doing 20 or 30MPH when the conditions EASILY allow for any reasonable vehicle to do at least the recommended speed limit, are they not infringing your human rights to use and enjoy your possesion (vehicle) within the scope of the law?

They have signed the document saying that they are competantly able to drive so by that reasoning if they are not "making reasonable and good" progress then they are doing it on purpose and infringing one's basic human rights.

Any thoughts?

Soul"I really need to get some sleep instead of pondering these things"patch.

[skittle]

Not being a legal type I guess that the speed limit only specifies a maximum speed and not a minimum speed therefore the said numpties are well within their rights to travel at speeds below the specified maximum.

[paolow]

skittle said: Not being a legal type I guess that the speed limit only specifies a maximum speed and not a minimum speed therefore the said numpties are well within their rights to travel at speeds below the specified maximum.

i discussed this recently with a police officer friend of mine who agreed that the 60 represented a safe maximum limit and not a speed to be religiously stuck to. so the numpty doing 30 in a sixty is withing his legal right to do so, irritating though it may be.
...

[pbrettle]

Yeah but there are a lot of police that want to get minimum speed limits imposed. Ok, so its only possible on a motorway - but either way we need to ensure that the speed difference is within reasonable and safe bounds.... not what we can currently get...

Cheers,

Paul

[Mr2Mike]

paolow said:
i discussed this recently with a police officer friend of mine who agreed that the 60 represented a safe maximum limit and not a speed to be religiously stuck to. so the numpty doing 30 in a sixty is withing his legal right to do so, irritating though it may be.
...

60 a safe maximum limit? That depends where it is I think.

Anyway, obstructing traffic is against the law (IIRC) so numpties are not within their rights to hold up traffic.

[soulpatch]

paolow said:

skittle said: Not being a legal type I guess that the speed limit only specifies a maximum speed and not a minimum speed therefore the said numpties are well within their rights to travel at speeds below the specified maximum.

I agree. But in the driving test if you are driving below the speed limit when conditions allow you to go faster then you are not making good progress and as a result will not pass your test.

They have signed the form and got the license stating they can drive at the speed limits and make good progress. Therefore by not doing so they are infringing everyones human rights by not doing what they have stated they are able to do.


i discussed this recently with a police officer friend of mine who agreed that the 60 represented a safe maximum limit and not a speed to be religiously stuck to. so the numpty doing 30 in a sixty is withing his legal right to do so, irritating though it may be.
...

[kevinday]

Is there not something that says drivers of slow moving vehicles should pull over and allow other drivers to pass?

[Mr E]

kevinday said: Is there not something that says drivers of slow moving vehicles should pull over and allow other drivers to pass?

Yup. But that would require them to use thier mirrors more than once a month......

[boosted ls1]

Why not give them a blast with your air horns when you overtake 2" away from the door mirror they never use. This way you can enjoy your human rights. As far as I'm concerned we should get them off the road if they're dangerous.

[hertsbiker]

..they shouldn't be driving!