another speeding ticket help

Turning_into_scrooge

wobbley wrote:

OK then, if speed kills I should be dead as a doornail ! I have in the past travelled at well over twice the legal limit on a motorway. And so you might think I'm irresponsible but on a totally clear motorway, not near any junctions, with absolutely no other traffic and I can see ahead for over a mile and the road is dry and the weather is clear I consider it safe. If there is other traffic, or any other potential hazard, even a bridge that someone could drop something off, then it's not safe and I'd slow down. Speed does not kill it's the driver's faliure to recognise and react to a hazard that causes accidents and exessive speed merely compounds the risk and makes the results worse.
It won't change the statistics a lot if everyone were to drive within the speed limits but still allow the idiots to drive recklessly.

I hope you stay safe.

marty1888

all you need to fightback against speeding fines.


http://forums.pepipoo.com/

wobbley

hjb123 wrote:

Travelling at more than 140mph on a motorway? Thats just plain irresponsible and stupid - noone needs to travel at that speed.

Either you can't read, or you just dont understand. Sure, I may have been driving very fast but it doesn't mean you're out of control, you've got to be more alert, more aware of potential hazard. And no I didn't need to go that fast, but I wanted to.

IvanOpinion wrote:

Its not very safe if you have a tyre blow out or your engine management system decides to play havoc or your power steering develops a fault or something goes wrong with the braking system or an animal suddenly runs out in front of you .. fortunately in (most of) those scenarios the only one likely to splattered all over the motorway is yourself

Yes, but I could have been hit by a falling meteor or hit by lightning. It's called a 'calculated risk'. And the risk was only to myself, if I had come a cropper then it would have been only myself. It wasn't a thing I did regularly or for a sustained time - only a few times for a couple of miles or so.

I really don't have to justify myself because I was there and the people that say it was just stupid weren't. I know it was safe. And if anyone knows the M180 you may possibly understand what I mean. It's the flattest, most featureless, boring bit of motorway in the UK.

The point is though - There is ALWAYS another factor to a high speed accident than just the speed. Either the driver under estimates their own capabilities or goes over the capabilities of their vehicle. By all means promote the cutting of speeding, especially in urban areas but it won't be a magical solution. Driver education, driver awareness, hazard recognition, careless, drunk and unfit drivers,- all these should be addressed too. We shouldn't be given the impression that if you cut your speed everything will be ok - there are other issues just as important when considering road safety.

Brainwashing may be too strong a word to use, but I can't help feeling that the Police are using the current trend of 'shocking' adverts about speeding partly to justify the placement of cameras in areas where generating lots of revenue and 'statistic fodder' is more important than reducing accidents.

IvanOpinion

wobbley wrote:

I really don't have to justify myself because I was there and the people that say it was just stupid weren't. I know it was safe. And if anyone knows the M180 you may possibly understand what I mean. It's the flattest, most featureless, boring bit of motorway in the UK.

You can say it was safe all you like but the fact remains it wasn't. You are right you don't have to justify yourself to us but you most definitely should be made to justify such actions in front of a judge ... I would love to see the judges reaction to a claim that 'speed does not kill', I would be pretty sure that he award 3 points for speeding and 3 points for stupidity .. or given some of the speeds mentioned in this thread he should rightly take the licence away completely until those people learn how to use the roads properly and with respect.

We can not pick and choose which laws suit ourselves. Going at speed is a bit of fun, I have a great picture of me going through a speed trap at 168mph, the difference was that was on a works Honda at Cadwell (sp?) Park. There are laws and I am 100% behind the police enforcing them .. I may not like some of them but they are there fore reason.

Most people believe they are invincible and they are great drivers .. most people are not, they have neither the skills or reactions to control a vehicle properly at speed. SPEED KILLS

Ivan

flang

If speed cameras where to save lifes why isnt there one outside my house?
Ive seen 1 person killed on a mototbike, 1 drunk killed, a girl ran over, a car hitting my wall, a car hitting a street light and many more non / serious accidents.
However there is a mobile speed trap about a mile down the road just before the speeding limit changes to 40! i have looked at the camera website and intrestly there has been less then 2 serious or fatals in the last 10 years!!
ive seen more outside my house for crist sake! but oh i forgot they wont make any money putting one outside my house!
I did hear though that they wasnt allowed to put cameras outside schools! Could somebody tell me why? isit because it doesnt go from 60 into a 30 or 30 into a 40 and no money will be made!

wobbley

flang wrote:

If speed cameras where to save lifes why isnt there one outside my house?
Ive seen 1 person killed on a mototbike, 1 drunk killed, a girl ran over, a car hitting my wall, a car hitting a street light and many more non / serious accidents.
However there is a mobile speed trap about a mile down the road just before the speeding limit changes to 40! i have looked at the camera website and intrestly there has been less then 2 serious or fatals in the last 10 years!!
ive seen more outside my house for crist sake! but oh i forgot they wont make any money putting one outside my house!
I did hear though that they wasnt allowed to put cameras outside schools! Could somebody tell me why? isit because it doesnt go from 60 into a 30 or 30 into a 40 and no money will be made!

Exactly ! As more of these cameras get installed, the more obvious it is that road safety in not the primary reason behind placement. Yes' there are some that are in the right place and do help reduce casualties and deaths but they are in the minority. I know of one road in my area where there were fatalities every 3 or 4 months. After 5 speed cameras were installed some years ago I haven't heard of a single fatality.

IvanOpinion wrote:

You can say it was safe all you like but the fact remains it wasn't.
Ivan

Like I said - You weren't there so you can't judge.

IvanOpinion wrote:

I have a great picture of me going through a speed trap at 168mph, the difference was that was on a works Honda at Cadwell (sp?) Park. Ivan

So why aren't you dead Ivan ? It may have been legal to do that speed at Cadwell Park but the safety aspect is different to the legal aspect. You were on a race track, so what ! it was legal thats the difference. If you forget the legal implications for a moment and just think about the safety issues. Were you any safer doing that speed on a racetrack than doing it on a completely clear stretch of straight,flat, dry motorway with no other traffic at all ?

I know I was in the wrong doing that speed on a public road and I wont deny it. If I had been caught I wouldn't have argued with what I got. But my argument is - I was well withing the limits of my vehicle, and I felt I was within my own capabilities. There was no other person in danger, and once traffic came within sight, I slowed down. So where is the 'danger'? Maybe the danger element is increased by going at 140 instead of 70 but not by a lot in the conditions I have described (and only then).
To imply I'm reckless doing 140 then go on to say how you did 168 shows you did not understand the point I was trying to show and you think 'legal' and 'safe' are the same thing.

As an aside Ivan, being on a works Honda puts you at a far higher risk of suffering a technical malfunction at high speed whether you're on track or road. (Thats from experience, not just an opinion)

Techno

All the arguments about 'why is it safe to drive at 29.9mph but not at 30.1mph etc' are irrelevant. The speed limit has to be set somewhere and in urban areas you are much more likely to survive being hit by a car at 30 than 40. Whilst I agree that the limits on our motorways are ridiculous and could be increased by at least 15mph, in urban areas they need reducing! (that'll be popular!!) It doesn't matter how good a driver you are - if a child runs out from behind a car (or a drunk staggers into the road from behind a van if it's 4am) with the best brakes in the world your car has a stopping distance and if that person is within that stopping distance you will hit them. It doesn't mean the driver was careless or negligent but these things happen. The faster you are going, the greater your stopping distance and the more likely you are to kill them.

the_chauffer

iwantosave wrote:

if pedestrians looked where they were going there wouldn't be so much death on the roads :rolleyes:

Please ignore this poster. Clone

---lee---

I don't agree with speeding, full stop, but I also hate speed cameras (reasons below). However, judging by the number of drivers who struggle to drive competently at the speed limits, it’s a good job that we have them and the line does have to be drawn somewhere.

In my experience, taxi drivers are amongst the worst out there, with BMW drivers coming a close second. As they say, familiarity breeds contempt. Worst possible combination would be a BMW driving taxi driver

Having recently started to give my wife driving lessons, I’m amazed at the number of drivers who will aggressively overtake in dangerous situations on residential roads whilst my wife has been driving at the correct maximum speed. When I’m driving the same car on the same roads without L plates, it does not happen (they sit 2 inches off your bumper instead).

I would prefer fixed speed cameras to be scrapped and for there to be more traffic cops on the road. That way, the cops could concentrate on the people that drive dangerously, aggressively and speed excessively. Speed cameras and other traffic calming measures are so distracting, I’m sure they detract from rather than add to safety. Since there advent, I'm sure the standard of driving has dropped.

A road I travel on daily has fixed 30 mph, 40mph and 50mph cameras. Each time you encounter a camera, speed abruptly drops as confused drivers brake heavily to cruise through the cameras at 10mph less than the limit, only to immediately speed up after the cameras. I fail to see how that adds to saftey.

Regarding advisory speed limits around schools during school hours. That sounds like a daft idea to me. Most schools have after hours activities/clubs etc, so in general there is always something going on around schools - except for late at night when the vandals move in to burn them down.

gregg1

wobbley wrote:

OK then, if speed kills I should be dead as a doornail ! I have in the past travelled at well over twice the legal limit on a motorway. And so you might think I'm irresponsible but on a totally clear motorway, not near any junctions, with absolutely no other traffic and I can see ahead for over a mile and the road is dry and the weather is clear I consider it safe. If there is other traffic, or any other potential hazard, even a bridge that someone could drop something off, then it's not safe and I'd slow down. Speed does not kill it's the driver's faliure to recognise and react to a hazard that causes accidents and exessive speed merely compounds the risk and makes the results worse.
It won't change the statistics a lot if everyone were to drive within the speed limits but still allow the idiots to drive recklessly.

I have just posted a reply on another thread where you and I are completely on the same wavelength about something so its a bit of a shock to now read your post on here. Sorry to say this but if the first bit of your post is true then you are indeed one of those people you refer to in your last sentence!

Its just plain arrogance to think you are above the law - because you have decided you can be trusted to drive at 140 mph then we should accept that. I can only hope and pray that the misjudgment you display above is not reflected in your driving - for all our sakes!

sorry to reply in this vein wobbly - like I say, I usually find myself agreeing with you on so many other things.