Caught speeding :-(!!!

dannyrst

poppasmurf_bewdley wrote: »

Let's hope you soon get the other three, so you'll get an automatic ban.

You shouldn't be on the road.

Unless he uses the car for work (taxi etc). Then he can rack up as many points as he wants without any ban.

Maxwell007

I drive a bugatti Veyron and yes a medal would be nice if your handing them out . .

poppasmurf_bewdley

Maxwell007 wrote: »

I drive a bugatti Veyron and yes a medal would be nice if your handing them out . .

Isn't that spelt: R-E-L-I-A-N-T-R-O-B-I-N!

Maxwell007

S.Line R-E-L-I-A-N-T-R-O-B-I-N looo0l

zaax

Another 3 points and you will be walking everywhere - you have been warned no speeding EVER.

Minrich

poppasmurf_bewdley wrote: »

Let's hope you soon get the other three, so you'll get an automatic ban.

You shouldn't be on the road.[/

Nice . Speed in itself is not dangerous .

mcpitman

Minrich wrote: »

poppasmurf_bewdley wrote: »

Let's hope you soon get the other three, so you'll get an automatic ban.

You shouldn't be on the road.[/

Nice . Speed in itself is not dangerous .

Idiot statement of the day. :T:T:T

The speed you are doing is not the issue, it is the sudden decelaration when you crash that causes the problems.

AdrianC

mcpitman wrote: »

Idiot statement of the day. :T:T:T

It's always nice to be forewarned, so thank you.

The speed you are doing is not the issue, it is the sudden decelaration when you crash that causes the problems.

I don't know about you, but I've always found "not crashing, but exceeding the speed limit" to be preferable to "crashing, but inside the speed limit".

Or, in case that was too subtle, whether a speed limit is being exceeded or not has nothing whatsover to do with the likelihood of crashing.
Inattention? Yes, definitely.
General wuckfittery? Absobloodylutely.
Absolute velocity, in and of itself, when taken solely in relation to an arbitrary number decided anything up to 80 years ago? Marginal, at best.

Ebe_Scrooge

Couldn't agree more with AdrianC. The number of times I've been on the motorway in snow and ice, when doing 70mph would be downright suicidal - but perfectly legal, at least in terms of complying with the speed limit. Conversely, Lewis Hamilton seems to manage to do 150mph or whatever without any ill effects.


It's an old chestnut, but completely true - speed isn't dangerous, inappropriate speed is.

AdrianC

Ebe_Scrooge wrote: »

It's an old chestnut, but completely true - speed isn't dangerous, inappropriate speed is.

And speed can be inappropriate WITHIN the limit as well as outside it.

If you tried to do anything close to the speed limit past here then, even if you got round the S-bend before my gate, you certainly wouldn't stay on the ground over the roller-coaster (where you can't see ANY tarmac in front of the bonnet). You might have landed in time for the sharp corner before the trees and stream, but it wouldn't make much difference.

Equally, there are many places where the limit is perfectly safe and appropriate to exceed by large margins, if you consider only the road conditions and sight lines, rather than legalities.

The irony is, of course, that if the exact same vehicle the OP was driving had slightly different interior fittings and a minor change to the V5C, 60 would have been legal on that same stretch of road instead of 50, and he may not have been prosecuted.