Caught...

[M1 Lupo]

You lucky Monkey!

[Crusoe]

£200 fine from court and no points?

did the police not turn up and show that their speedo was calibrated etc. so the actual speed couldn't be judged other than the visual evidence you were well over the limit?

[Philplop]

You lucky bug*er.

What part of the highways act did he break?

Edited March 5, 2007 by philip_wilkinson1

[matt~black]

told ya you'd get away with it fair play to ya wish me luck with my 37 in a 30 i'm in court in a couple of weeks but i have a copper as an independant expert several massive feck ups on their part and they are witholding evidence so hopefuilly will get thrown out

[RS2quattro]

I think the punishment handed out for this kind of thing (speed on mway in low traffic) is too high: potential loss of job; abilaty to function (in this country style="vertical-align:middle" emoid=":rolleyes:" border="0" alt="rolleyes.gif" /> ); prison if the courts see fit etc.

Conversley it would stop me doing it if my car was capable - so the law works.

I agree when people say you should expect to get a ban for 100 mph+, but I really think the punishment is way out of proportion. Up to a month at most. For speeds over 110 ish. You would feel it and think thrice before you do it again but not screw your family. Get caught at over 150mph and I think the present penalties are appropriate.

Speed is a crap way to define dangerous anyway

On a clear day:

105mph is a cruise for an Audi S4

105mph is safe in say a Ibiza Cupra

105mph is not safe in a Lupo 1.4s (Sorry guys, they take ages to slow down. I have tried. On a track.)

But 130mph is still safe in the same conditions for the S4 (in my opinion)

Again, 100mph in the wet in the S4 with 6 other cars kicking up spray is not safe style="vertical-align:middle" emoid=":blink:" border="0" alt="blink.gif" />

But then even if the limit was 130 ish, you would have the usual heros driving up peoples bumpers at or over the limit at 8:30am in busy traffic in the pouring rain. style="vertical-align:middle" emoid=":angry2:" border="0" alt="angry.gif" />

Safe driving is not the first thing on 95% of the populations minds when they get in their car, so we have speed limits.

Limits should be tiered like in France, perhaps 80mph in the wet, 110mph the rest of the time.

Police should be able to do more folk for tailgating. A right hand indicator is enough of a reminder that you want past (as in europe).

/rant. style="vertical-align:middle" emoid=":blush:" border="0" alt="blush.gif" />

(ps. Do over the speed limit in a 30/40 of even a 50 in urban ares and you should get a kicking. Again IMHO style="vertical-align:middle" emoid=":coffee:" border="0" alt="coffee.gif" /> )

[RS2quattro]

Just read the result.

Very lucky.

Glad you still have your lisence, you didn't deserve to lose it by the sounds of things.

[Adam K]

told ya you'd get away with it fair play to ya wish me luck with my 37 in a 30 i'm in court in a couple of weeks but i have a copper as an independant expert several massive feck ups on their part and they are witholding evidence so hopefuilly will get thrown out

why the hell would you go to court for 37 in a 30?

[Az_zA]

Wow m8, your one lucky b*gger!

[matt~black]

why the hell would you go to court for 37 in a 30?

because i already have 3 points and i got caught within my 2 years probation so i am looking at a ban if i don't get away with it

[Gibbeth!]

You lucky lucky batsard!!

[Philplop]

I'm pretty sure it's "Oooh, you lucky *******!"

That bit's hilarious. style="vertical-align:middle" emoid=":lol:" border="0" alt="laugh.gif" />

[Gibbeth!]

No style="vertical-align:middle" emoid=":shades:" border="0" alt="shades.gif" />

Quotes style="vertical-align:middle" emoid=";)" border="0" alt="wink.gif" />

[Cliveski]

I have enjoyed reading this post and people's different views on speeding.

134 mph in a 60 mph area is unacceptable however you look at it and I can't believe some people on here have tried to justify it - at least Dubya hasn't.

Sure some cars are capable of high speeds, etc etc but most cars on the road are not - you can't mix the two which is why for everyones safety we have speed limits that everyone should 'generally' stick to.

As an aside - had Dubya commited a murder would we all feel so pleased if he got off on a technicality?

Personally - and I'm not having a go at Dubya, I'm having a go at the 'system' - it's very worrying when apparently straight-forward cases fall apart because of a technicality - where has common sense gone?

[LoopyLing]

you didn't try this then... bbc/wales

[Philplop]

No style="vertical-align:middle" emoid=":shades:" border="0" alt="shades.gif" />

Quotes style="vertical-align:middle" emoid=";)" border="0" alt="wink.gif" />

Ah, I was on about this bit. Didn't think it was Palin saying it, but I wasn't quite sure.

http://www.mwscomp.com/movies/brian/brian-13.htm

style="vertical-align:middle" emoid=":shades:" border="0" alt="shades.gif" />

[Gibbeth!]

Forgot about that! Prefer the prison scene though!

style="vertical-align:middle" emoid=":rolleyes:" border="0" alt="rolleyes.gif" />

[Dubya]

134 mph in a 60 mph area is unacceptable however you look at it and I can't believe some people on here have tried to justify it - at least Dubya hasn't.

Sure some cars are capable of high speeds, etc etc but most cars on the road are not - you can't mix the two which is why for everyones safety we have speed limits that everyone should 'generally' stick to.

Your exactly right, our kid. I really couldn't agree with you more....

There's a time and a place for speed. 5/10mph here or there, you could probably get away with, but anything else is plain loonacy on the roads these days. If it wasn't for the fact that The Highways Act is now a big part of my job, I wouldn't have known any different. Most people in the UK don't even know that it exists, or what it sets out.

It could so easily have all gone totally pear-shaped... style="vertical-align:middle" emoid=":huh:" border="0" alt="huh.gif" />

[penry]

The woman above who wrote to the police pretending that she was her daughter saying she had died! The road she got caught on is the exact same road where our car got caught doing 42 in the 30, but we honestly didnt know if it was my mum or dad because the car had rear headrests so couldnt tell who was driving. Luckyyyy.

[BigMon]

What bit of the Highways Act did the copper break then?

Surely you'll understand that I find your story a bit implausible? I can't believe the police would just let a 134mph in a 60 go with just a minor slap on the wrist.

[Dubya]

What bit of the Highways Act did the copper break then?

Surely you'll understand that I find your story a bit implausible? I can't believe the police would just let a 134mph in a 60 go with just a minor slap on the wrist.

That's feasible, but they have to... legally.

The Highways Act is a government guideline, which sets out what you can and can't do on a Public Highway - with respect to Maintanence/Enforcment and Protection of Right of Way/Use of the highway itself, and it's class etc etc...

Basically, The Police have to work to this same Highways Act, in the same way I have to. If I need to close of a road section for Maintenance say, I need to look at Right of Ways, highway class (whether it's a main road, whether it's a trunk road, or a side road), and I need to look at lighting, signing and guarding, along with a whole host of other aspects.

The Police work on the highway, so legally, have to look at all the same aspects whenever they undertake a task. EVERY speed camera van in the Country BREAKS the Highways Act. They don't have flashing amber beacons on their roof, that are visible from all angles. They don't have red and yellow warning chevrons across the back of the vehicle. They don't, typically, have any proper markings on them to show what they are (most are plain vans these days). And NONE park up on the verge/kerbside and cone off a safety zone... let alone, put up extra warning signs at set distances from the safety zone to warn drivers. The drivers/operators typically, don't wear the correct PPE for visibility and protection either. If they did, they'd never catch anyone... because you'd see them a mile off.

When a traffic cop pulls you over, he's working on the highway. He can't ask you to stop on the hard shoulder, or on a soft verge, he has to move you on to a safe parking area away from the roadside. IF he stops you on the roadside, he legally has to cone off a safety zone, has to park up with his beacons flashing, and has to display road signs to warn other motorists of their presence. He also has to wear the right PPE - high vis jacket, boots etc.

The cop that pulled me, didn't. He never put his jacket on, and didn't have any beacons on his car roof - only the blue flashers in his front grill, and side light/head light strobes... A petty technicality, but a technicality non the less.

Protest against a safety camera van conviction, on the basis that they break the Highways Act, and chances are they'll drop the case.

style="vertical-align:middle" emoid=":)" border="0" alt="smile.gif" />

[dotdotdash]

Top Tip style="vertical-align:middle" emoid=":thumbsup:" border="0" alt="thumbsup.gif" />

[RS2quattro]

Indeed, cheers for that.

(dunno about having the balls to say all that in front of a judge though style="vertical-align:middle" emoid=":blush:" border="0" alt="blush.gif" />)

[Putney]

I would use every fault with their case under the sun to get off.

So what i don't understand about your statement is are you saying it is not legal for them to pull you over to the hard shoulder without them wearnig high vis jackets and putting cones out?

Edited March 7, 2007 by Putney

[BigMon]

That's feasible, but they have to... legally.

The Highways Act is a government guideline, which sets out what you can and can't do on a Public Highway - with respect to Maintanence/Enforcment and Protection of Right of Way/Use of the highway itself, and it's class etc etc...

Basically, The Police have to work to this same Highways Act, in the same way I have to. If I need to close of a road section for Maintenance say, I need to look at Right of Ways, highway class (whether it's a main road, whether it's a trunk road, or a side road), and I need to look at lighting, signing and guarding, along with a whole host of other aspects.

The Police work on the highway, so legally, have to look at all the same aspects whenever they undertake a task. EVERY speed camera van in the Country BREAKS the Highways Act. They don't have flashing amber beacons on their roof, that are visible from all angles. They don't have red and yellow warning chevrons across the back of the vehicle. They don't, typically, have any proper markings on them to show what they are (most are plain vans these days). And NONE park up on the verge/kerbside and cone off a safety zone... let alone, put up extra warning signs at set distances from the safety zone to warn drivers. The drivers/operators typically, don't wear the correct PPE for visibility and protection either. If they did, they'd never catch anyone... because you'd see them a mile off.

When a traffic cop pulls you over, he's working on the highway. He can't ask you to stop on the hard shoulder, or on a soft verge, he has to move you on to a safe parking area away from the roadside. IF he stops you on the roadside, he legally has to cone off a safety zone, has to park up with his beacons flashing, and has to display road signs to warn other motorists of their presence. He also has to wear the right PPE - high vis jacket, boots etc.

The cop that pulled me, didn't. He never put his jacket on, and didn't have any beacons on his car roof - only the blue flashers in his front grill, and side light/head light strobes... A petty technicality, but a technicality non the less.

Protest against a safety camera van conviction, on the basis that they break the Highways Act, and chances are they'll drop the case.

style="vertical-align:middle" emoid=":)" border="0" alt="smile.gif" />

Now that makes your story plausible. style="vertical-align:middle" emoid=":)" border="0" alt="smile.gif" />

Hope it works for me if I ever get caught.

[Cliveski]

Very Interesting Dubya,

How come you still got a fine? (I assume you didn't get any points).

At what point did you reveal your 'knowledge' to have the charges dropped?