Next time you flash you headlights.........

hubert_cumberdale

i could add me at the bottom of the table with a near miss

my shoe lace was undone and in the door enough to let me operate the throttle but when i came to brake it wasnt long enough lol

made me jump a bit

wonder if anyone else has done that

anotherbaldrick

hubert_cumberdale wrote: »

i could add me at the bottom of the table with a near miss

my shoe lace was undone and in the door enough to let me operate the throttle but when i came to brake it wasnt long enough lol

made me jump a bit

wonder if anyone else has done that

No but it would make me learn two feet braking quickly.

diable

Gene_Hunt wrote: »

If you say so.

I take it you will be representing him on appeal then.

nah its his own fault that he got caught and stupid enough to get taken to court as you can usually blag your way out of things like this reminds me of being chased by a Police car around Parliament Square last year but thats another story

billy_the_kid_2

I always warn other motorists of speed traps. Its very common throughout europe. In France you will get almost eveyone warning you sometimes many miles before the trap.

WastingMyTime

Inactive wrote: »

Serves him right, he should use his headlights as advised in the Highway Code.

Let them that decide to ignore speed limits get their just deserves.:)

Agree.

Personally, I believe that speeders should be fined at least £1000.00 or more because my Life is Priceless.

cyclonebri1

WastingMyTime wrote: »

Agree.

Personally, I believe that speeders should be fined at least £1000.00 or more because my Life is Priceless.

Unlike your post:A

As a second take; The guy flashed his headlights at an oncoming car to warn of a hazard up ahead, ie, a situation where some drivers if only doing 30mph will slam the anchors on in panic and could cause an accident. Only convicted because of an annoyed cop and an over sympathetic magistrate. It will be overturned methinks.

Inactive

cyclonebri1 wrote: »

It will be overturned methinks.

I do hope not.:)

WastingMyTime

cyclonebri1 wrote: »

Unlike your post:A

As a second take; The guy flashed his headlights at an oncoming car to warn of a hazard up ahead, ie, a situation where some drivers if only doing 30mph will slam the anchors on in panic and could cause an accident. Only convicted because of an annoyed cop and an over sympathetic magistrate. It will be overturned methinks.

1. There will be no hazard ahead if people remained within the speed limit.
2. Flashing of headlights does not say "speed camera ahead". I believe it means that it is a warning to other drivers that you are there.
3. Other uses of flashing headlights could be "I'm letting you pass around the object because I'll remain stationary". Or "You go instead of me and I'll wait for you" or"I've noticed something about you that you need to be aware of because I think its dangerous" or "Turn you lights on, its dark". So, he wasn't keeping the roads safe by flashing his headlights because of the many different uses and interpretations of the action.
4. The guy could have caused an accident when he flashed his lights at oncoming traffic as someone could have thought there was something wrong with them or their car that was dangerous and so slam on their brakes resulting in an accident caused by the too-goody vigilante.
5. You should be far enough away from the vehicle in front of you that if they did slam on their brakes - you also could stop safely even if suddenly. You are supposed to keep your distance and remain fully alert.

Paradigm

WastingMyTime wrote: »

Agree.

Personally, I believe that speeders should be fined at least £1000.00 or more because my Life is Priceless.

But there is no evidence that anyone was speeding?
Surely this was crime prevention?

If a neighbourhood watch scheme prevents a burglary (unlikely I know) is that also obstructing the Police?

Are the signs that flash up your speed & tell you to slow down obstructing the police?

If you stop your mate driving when bladdered are you obstucting the Police?

Speed limits & cameras are for road safety we are told so anything helping that cause should be applauded, not criminalised!

This case shows without any doubt that mobile traps are exactly that...traps designed to rake in as much money as possible & absolutely nothing to do with road safety!

Inactive wrote: »

I do hope not.:)

As pointed out in the thread there is already case law meaning you will be disappointed if the guy gets proper representation!

In fact, the only crime he commited was representing himself.

Inactive

Paradigm wrote: »

As pointed out in the thread there is already case law meaning you will be disappointed if the guy gets proper representation!

In fact, the only crime he commited was representing himself.

Obviously the court didn't think so.