Third speeding ticket in six months!!

[bless 'em all]

Here are Department of Transport speed flow statistics for 2010:


drive at 30 mph and someone will soon be up your arse and a line of traffic form behind.

How does that justify going over the speed limit? You're driving for yourself, not the people behind you.

[TimberWolf]

How does that justify going over the speed limit? You're driving for yourself, not the people behind you.

It doesn't.

You are driving over the limit too. Everyone does it, but some are oblivious to it.

[centurian]

I have to admit defeat on this one!!!

It was Wikipedia though - and that statement did not have a citation, so it could still be utter claptrap.

Although it doesn't make common sense. If i were a motor manufacturer, I'd make sure to include a "fudge factor" on the speedo.

[Platypus]

Looks like the speed awareness course didn't work for you.

fine me but don't take my livelihood away

Does the person you might knock over and kill have this choice?

no way was I doing any more than anyone else on the the road

That's not really the point is it? Officer, they were all raping her I just joined in.

staring at the speedo in a 30 while it's just over, is it 35 who knows, cos it's inaccurate at low speed, watch the road or watch the speedo?

You're kidding, right? If the speedo says <35 you're fine. Do you find it so hard to maintain a constant speed and occasionally glance down at the speedo?

I'll take the rap no option

How magnanimous of you.

Could it be more revenue earning cameras?

Ah that's it! It wasn't you're fault at all! Are you sure you were breaking the law, or are they just out to get you?

Tossers!

I'll invite you to think about who is the real tosser here.

[IR35 Avoider]

So do u do 27mph on the speedo to allow for error? Do you check the speedo while driving at 30 or 27? Can you be sure you are being vigilant if you do check, and can you be sure you are within the limit if you don't check and are therefore not vigilant?

As somone else already pointed out, you've got the error the wrong way around. I always set cruise control at limit+10%, so 33 in a 30 zone. My TomTom shows me as exactly on the speed limit then, i.e. my speedometer is exactly 10% out. I sail through cameras without a single touch on the brakes, unlike most of those around me.The chief frustration of this kind of driving is that I'm constantly in danger of ending up the backside of people who believe their speedometers. Then when I change lane to try to overtake, I end up with someone up my backside because I'm reluctant to speed to avoid holding them up. (If you do 50 it takes a long time to overtake someone doing 47. I often do end up putting my foot down, for a bit.)

(I'm disappointed that no-one has come back or elaborated on the observation someone made that using cruise control is illegal. I use it all the time, and have no intention of stopping, but would be interested to learn more.)

[NotAllThere]

In some countries it's illegal to use cruise control in a city, or in heavy traffic on the motorways, but not in the UK.

[EternalOptimist]

Does the person you might knock over and kill have this choice?



That's not really the point is it? Officer, they were all raping her I just joined in.

bolks.
we dont convict people for rape on the statistical liklihood that they might rape someone.

if I did 30 in a 30 zone, with the street full of kids playing football. and I mowed a few down, according to your logic I would be ok.

According to mine , you would be guilty. Guilty of a lack of judgement. And if you are going to ask people to show judgement at one end of the scale, you should allow them to use it at the other

[Freamon]

But that would be temporary. I seem to remember there were average speed cameras put up in Leicester or somewhere - the council expected to catch thousands per month and use the proceeds to fund more. In the first month they only caught 9 - so they had to abandon rolling out the scheme elsewhere.

Which pretty much negates the notion that speed cameras are designed for safety. Clearly the first ones they put up did an excellent job (forced people to drive at a certain speed), so no reason not to put up more of them. Average speed cameras in motorway roadworks are the only places I've ever seen where the vast majority of people stick to the limit. The sat-nav we've got is pretty good in those situations as well as it warns you if you creep up over 50.

[wim121]

On a lit road, you can choose to have only your sidelights on.

Maybe you should read up on your highway code before lecturing others.

I have read up on my highway code actually and know pretty much the whole thing off by heart, so stop being deliberately provocative. I knew that paragraph of by heart as well as others in the code as I have stated them numerous times.

You MUST use headlights at night, except on a road which has lit street lighting. These roads are generally restricted to a speed limit of 30 mph (48 km/h) unless otherwise specified.

The highway code is quite black and white. If they wanted everyone to drive around with headlights on all roads, they wouldnt add the exception. They add the exception because of the following:

114. You MUST NOT:
use any lights in a way which would dazzle or cause discomfort to other road users, including pedestrians, cyclists and horse riders.

Read the rest of the highway code, before making an idiot out of yourself by trying to correct others.

The exception is there as on lit streets with a 30mph limit, other road users can see a vehicle with sidelights quite easily. A vehicle driving with headlights can very easily dazzle pedestrians which is a risk if they are dazzled as they are crossing the road for example.

Also if you bothered reading the first page of your highway code:

Many of the rules in the Code are legal requirements, and if you disobey these rules you are committing a criminal offence. You may be fined, given penalty points on your licence or be disqualified from driving. In the most serious cases you may be sent to prison. Such rules are identified by the use of the words ' '

So far, absolute rules have been pointed out, however your first page says more:

Although failure to comply with the other rules of the Code will not, in itself, cause a person to be prosecuted, The Highway Code may be used in evidence in any court proceedings under the Traffic Acts ( see 'The road user and the law' ) to establish liability. This includes rules which use advisory wording such as 'should/should not' or 'do/do not'.

So even if part of the highway code states that instead of the words 'must'/'do' or 'do not' with referenced laws underneath, ignoring advice on safe road use principles as advised in the guide can be used in evidence against you.

[wim121]

In some countries it's illegal to use cruise control in a city, or in heavy traffic on the motorways, but not in the UK.

Not true .... While you shouldnt be done for it by any reasonable police force, it is an offense if they deem it to be:

149. You MUST exercise proper control of your vehicle at all times

Now it is completely debatable as to what proper control is. But arguing in court, unless you had full control of your vehicles speed, had your feet and hands in the proper positions, then one could argue you dont have full control.

Cruise control takes over the vehicles handling of speed, so one is surrendering part of their control of the vehicle, so that means one is NOT in proper control of their vehicle at all times, as they should be.