Caught speeding.

[Bluepete]

Please see below. Bigape, well done mate, you knew you were in the "wrong" and accept it.

I wonder what the situation would be if you were on 9 points and had a safety camera fine.

Originally Posted by mpaton2005

I wonder what the situation would be if you were on 9 points and had a safety camera fine.

I wouldnt be speeding if Id been caught that many times and had those points

if youve got that many points rather than go to court to get a harsher sentence and costs if you lose shouldnt you be sitting there thinking perhaps you should slow down a bit?

after all if youre observations that poor to get caught three times [assuming the 3 points allocation here] for the speed youre doing wouldnt that be ringing alarm bells about your safety and that you may be riding beyond your limits in that youre missing the cameras/cars? its not like theyre not signposted is it

[Biker Biggles]

Mpaton,quite right,and suppose you stood to lose your job\home\family because you tweaked the throttle 50 yards before the speed limit ended.Just take it on the chin like a fine upstanding citizen.Of course you would.

Originally Posted by lynw

I wouldnt be speeding if Id been caught that many times and had those points

if youve got that many points rather than go to court to get a harsher sentence and costs if you lose shouldnt you be sitting there thinking perhaps you should slow down a bit?

after all if youre observations that poor to get caught three times [assuming the 3 points allocation here] for the speed youre doing wouldnt that be ringing alarm bells about your safety and that you may be riding beyond your limits in that youre missing the cameras/cars? its not like theyre not signposted is it

That's not the point. The point is:

a) Not all speed limits are clearly signposted

b) Mobile cameras can and will do you for 35 mph from a range of a thousand feet peeking out of a bush.

c) The three points may not come from speeding. They could come from rolling over a red light line to let an ambulance past. They'll still book you and ban you.

d) Safety is not measured in miles per hour. In fact I would suggest you are significantly more of a risk to yourself and other road users as you'll be focusing almost _entirely_ on speed at the top of your driving priority list.

I've not got any points myself but I would have thought it would be terrifying to know (particularly if you drove for a living) that you could lose your entire livelihood on one technical violation at 57mph through an unmanned set of motorway roadworks (read the TRL595 report which explains that speed cameras at roadworks have no effect on casualties)

This is the culture that 'safety cameras' have given us. If it were me and my family, home and job depended on my driving, I'd be contesting it like there was no tomorrow.

Originally Posted by lynw

great. another one who doesnt see the cost of this to those of us who cant get justice for more serious cases because the courts are full of people guilty of the offence making a useless and expensive point.

See above re: explanation of circumstances where this principle would be annulled.

Originally Posted by mpaton2005

That's not the point. The point is:

a) Not all speed limits are clearly signposted

b) Mobile cameras can and will do you for 35 mph from a range of a thousand feet peeking out of a bush.

c) The three points may not come from speeding. They could come from rolling over a red light line to let an ambulance past. They'll still book you and ban you.

d) Safety is not measured in miles per hour. In fact I would suggest you are significantly more of a risk to yourself and other road users as you'll be focusing almost _entirely_ on speed at the top of your driving priority list.

I've not got any points myself but I would have thought it would be terrifying to know (particularly if you drove for a living) that you could lose your entire livelihood on one technical violation at 57mph through an unmanned set of motorway roadworks (read the TRL595 report which explains that speed cameras at roadworks have no effect on casualties)

This is the culture that 'safety cameras' have given us. If it were me and my family, home and job depended on my driving, I'd be contesting it like there was no tomorrow.

fair points but advocating wasting court time when youre actually guilty of the offence charged because you dont agree with it has impacts on others who have their cases deferred because of people wasting court time.

Imho that is purely selfish and typical of the cant accept responsibility for own actions and litigation culture so evident in the US and depressingly the way this country is going.

Thats not to say I dont understand anyone facing a ban doing their utmost to avoid it. But on 9 points the best way to avoid a ban is dont speed.

If you don't agree with it then it's the perfect reason to contest it. I think you are being slightly blinkered by the unforunate delay in your court case here.

A useful quote from Buddha may help matters:

"Believe nothing, no matter where you read it, or who said it, no matter if I have said it, unless it agrees with your own reason and your own common sense."

(in case it's not clear - I do not believe the reasonable and considered actions taken by the majority of motorists in this country should be criminalised so severely by the action of exceeding a statutory numerical speed limit which has little or no bearing on safety at the time, and particularly when the other actions or circumstances migitating the speed limit violation are left unconsidered by the enforcement camera)

Originally Posted by mpaton2005

If you don't agree with it then it's the perfect reason to contest it. I think you are being slightly blinkered by the unforunate delay in your court case here.

not entirely. I think if you are guilty of breaking the law and you know you are then you should accept the consequences of your actions. If you cant do that then you should not speed. Quite simple belief of mine really.

Its not entirely driven by whats happened but the fact I see an increasing blame everyone else culture like America going on here. Which is coupled with the inability of people to take responsibility for their actions and face up to the consequences when they get caught.

Do you seriously believe contesting cases makes an iota of difference or ever will? No it wont. All, and seriously, ALL it does is make useless and pointless protests which clog up the legal system. Those cases where the police have been at fault just close another loophole as they tighten up procedures so in future there will be no technicalities to get off on.

Rightly or wrongly, speeding is against the law. You make a choice when you speed to knowingly break that law. Whether you see no reason for the limit is irrelevant. You broke the law. Contesting it in court wont change the law, this is clear by now. So why do it unless a persons looking at a ban in which case why are they speeding and treating their licence like a right not a priviledge?

And before you wonder if I am for real in life as here, I make that choice every day on the motorway. And I was honest and ready to accept what was coming when I was pulled by the police at 95 on the M1. Possibly the only person to confess to 95-100 and get let off rather than give them grief or have a go for an unjust offence and get done.

Originally Posted by lynw

not entirely. I think if you are guilty of breaking the law and you know you are then you should accept the consequences of your actions. If you cant do that then you should not speed. Quite simple belief of mine really.

Its not entirely driven by whats happened but the fact I see an increasing blame everyone else culture like America going on here. Which is coupled with the inability of people to take responsibility for their actions and face up to the consequences when they get caught.

Do you seriously believe contesting cases makes an iota of difference or ever will? No it wont. All, and seriously, ALL it does is make useless and pointless protests which clog up the legal system. Those cases where the police have been at fault just close another loophole as they tighten up procedures so in future there will be no technicalities to get off on.

Rightly or wrongly, speeding is against the law. You make a choice when you speed to knowingly break that law. Whether you see no reason for the limit is irrelevant. You broke the law. Contesting it in court wont change the law, this is clear by now. So why do it unless a persons looking at a ban in which case why are they speeding and treating their licence like a right not a priviledge?

I have a right to (reasonably) free speech and I do _not_ have to accept something just because it has been sent through on a piece of paper saying "You did xx at xx, please sign here to incriminate yourself". I have a right to make a fair contestation to something that I do not _believe_ to be correct. That's why we have courts.

I'm afraid that I think you are being quite hypocritical and going back to "the law" (as you put) allows citizens of our country to do such things, regardless of how annoying you think it is.

You also avoided my suggestion about cameras making no account for circumstances.

Do you think for example that it would be fair to be prosecuted for exceeding a posted limit when in doing so, you prevented a serious accident from occuring?

Do you think it's fair to be prosecuted by a traffic light camera if a lorry which has skidded on its approach to the lights in poor conditions (but within the legal limit) is in danger of rear ending you at 30mph, causing you to take the decision to go through the lights, again to prevent a serious collision?

The camera partnerships don't give the slightest thought to anything like this. All they are interested in is getting your sixty quid as efficiently as possible.

Finally, to top it all off, do you think it's justifiable that PC Mark Milton et al are allowed to get away with both speeding and dangerous driving while driving at 155mph, when an ordinary member of the public would be jailed and banned for such speeds?

While there are inconsistencies like this which make a mockery of the entire system, I'm sorry, but I _will_ be taking up court time.