tinyurl.com/5ta7nyp
Should the Country's financial state be taken into account or is it just another loop hole for persistent offenders?
Pat
|
Negative Equity has been around for ages... I'm not sure they should use the current economic climate as an excuse...
What puzzles me with this sort of transgression is the persons' thinking, if you need your licence for your work what on earth are you thinking driving at that speed? If it were a few mph over the limit maybe there is an excuse, but over 30mph over (or 40? Not sure on the road).. There is really no excuse for that and it shouldn't be let off.
Last edited by: hobby on Wed 23 Feb 11 at 09:34
|
>> Hobby's post @ Wed 23 Feb 11 09:34
>>
Great post, Hobby! Completely logical, and full of common sense.
That is EXACTLY what the prosecution should be saying when these people get hauled up before whoever has to try them.
It's criminals that use spurious excuses like this who spoil it for those people who have genuine mitigating circumstances to put before the courts.
|
Muddled thinking. One law for most people , another for those who have to travel to work.
By definition if your livelyhood depends on your license you should be EXTRA careful. Law is effectivley saying you can be less careful.
But in accordance with the principles of British justice "Protect the guilty and punish the innocent"
|
I get sick of reading about drivers in my local rag who 'get off' because they need a car/van for work.
Often they already have 9 points and in the grand scheme of things should be banned. In my circumstances, because I can walk to work for one of my jobs, and catch the train for the other, I would be. If you really, really need a car for work, then drive with more care and attention.
I hate the double standards of the courts. If you lose your job, then tough. No sympathy from me. And you don't lose your licence for a first offence unless you are well over the speed limit.
|
I've sat through a few undue hardship cases, and I've had sympathy with one or two, which is most unlike me.
One or two employers of mobile service engineers and the like put enormous pressure on staff to get to a set number of calls.
Inevitably, this leads to them pressing on between locations.
While it would be easy to tell the driver to resist the pressure, practically that would be seen as militancy and would lead to loss of the job, one way or another.
My conclusion is there are one or two deserving undue hardship cases, but far more undeserving ones.
Last edited by: Iffy on Wed 23 Feb 11 at 10:37
|
|
Is there any law which prosecutes an employer for policies which put pressure on employees to break the law to meet otherwise barely attainable targets?
Last edited by: Wilberstuforce31 on Wed 23 Feb 11 at 10:39
|
>> Is there any law which prosecutes an employer for policies which put pressure on employees
>> to break the law to meet otherwise barely attainable targets?
Yes there is, but you wont find any evidence to back it in court. All wil say, "AH yes we have H&S and Working Time Directive policies in our staff manuals"
No-one has the brains to link this to under staffing, redundancy and clearly unachievable workloads.
|
In the case of a lorry driver the law states....
How you become liable to prosecution:
USE
Using is an absolute liability offence. Anyone who gains by the offence is guilty of ‘using’.
Director = Financial Gain
Driver = Earning wages
CAUSE
Causing needs some guilty knowledge and a degree of direction such as pressure to exceed hours
However, any pressure is difficult to prove as it's usually by word of mouth.
The guy in the original link was a lorry driver and was fully aware of how many points he already had.
For the majority of us that is all we need to keep to the speed limit in both a car or at work.
He was an idiot.
Pat
|
|
Report does not state offence time but 101 on the A9, a mix of dual/single improved and unimproved with many flat junctions verges on criminal negligence.
|
Bromptonaut>>but 101 on the A9... is criminal
Quite.
I must say, I once did take my car up to that sort of speed (on a German motorway, obviously, when it was empty on a dry morning) and vowed never again.
|
>> Inevitably, this leads to them pressing on between locations.
>>
I agree iffy, and a few mph over I could understand... but 101mph?!
|
...I agree iffy, and a few mph over I could understand... but 101mph?!...
Agreed, this case does not fall into my 'some sympathy' category.
|
|
Driving fast between meetings doesn't make any difference whatsoever to your arrival times. Check the ETA on your Satnav. Over a 45 minute journey you have to drive like an absolute nutter to get the ETA down by one or two minutes. You may feel like you're making progress, but you're not.
|
...You may feel like you're making progress, but you're not....
Very good point, but magistrates seem to be taken in by the excuse more often than not.
|
There are a lot of hypocrites on this forum. It's interesting isn't it, the number of posts where people are telling how they have/need big engined powerful cars that go round corners on rails etc etc, and yet, they never exceed the speed limit, oh no !
The same people that cry "Jail speeders" or "take away their license".
Driving fast in the right conditions on the right road is not dangerous but the brainwashing process that tells us that anything over the speed limit is dangerous is almost complete.
I break the speed limit every day as I can almost guarantee everyone else does.
|
I break the speed limit every day
>>>
>>>>>>> are you the person that overtook me this morning in the 40 limit then?
because you think you have a right to drive on closed hatchings and scatter shield my windscreen?
i also see you have failed to post on my question today mrt43 about a man who is to lose his business because he is in hospital and another driver deemed it safe to ignore speed limits and crashed into him
Last edited by: Bellboy on Wed 23 Feb 11 at 15:59
|
MrTee43>>It's interesting isn't it, the number of posts where people are telling how they have/need big engined powerful cars that
Really? Most of this forum is about people boasting how frugal their cars are; how cheap they are to run; how they're enjoying retirement, and what anti-depressant they're on. Hardly the average boyracer, surely.
|
>> Driving fast in the right conditions on the right road is not dangerous but the
>> brainwashing process that tells us that anything over the speed limit is dangerous is almost
>> complete.
>>
>> I break the speed limit every day as I can almost guarantee everyone else does.
>>
But driving fast through a area where people may step out onto the road, but you cant see them and/or another car is going to join the road that you are on IS
Driving fast on a road where everyone else sticks to the speed limit is dangerous, and down right stupid most people (me included) do not have the skill to handle a car at speeds half or double than the speed limit I could not live with my self if i was speeding and i knocked someone down and killed them - could you?
The fact that in the link it says it was a 40mph limit, and there was a parked car suggests to me that the road probably cannot support more than that, and the fact that him and his car could not handle them speeds on that road
The driver was a idiot, and people who behave like him are idiots.
|
|
Last edited by: Redviper on Wed 23 Feb 11 at 16:48
|
>> There are a lot of hypocrites on this forum. It's interesting isn't it, the number
>> of posts where people are telling how they have/need big engined powerful cars that go
>> round corners on rails etc etc, and yet, they never exceed the speed limit, oh
>> no !
Must be a different forum you are on.. Or you may know of members who drive at 100mph. I don't.
>> Driving fast in the right conditions on the right road is not dangerous but the
>> brainwashing process that tells us that anything over the speed limit is dangerous is almost
>> complete.
>>
>> I break the speed limit every day as I can almost guarantee everyone else does.
>
Statements like that frankly show you ARE a danger to others IF that attitude carries through into your driving style..a contempt for the skills and attitudes of others. I am sure it does not. (You may of course be a careful and considerate driver - but your post suggests otherwise)
I am sure you did not mean it but accusing others of breaking the law as you do does not win any friends or support in any argument...
Last edited by: madf on Wed 23 Feb 11 at 17:39
|
Speeding is, IMHO, antisocial, dangerous and selfish.
I don't deny that I have been guilty of speeding (25 years ago, as a teenager), but I shudder to think what would have happened had I had a blowout or a dog/person/other vehicle got in my way. I was a c**p driver then; I hope I'm far better now, but I know that I could not handle a car properly enough to be in complete control of it at high speed.
There's really no need to speed. You almost never get there more quickly. As other folks here have said, are you on the right forum?
|
>> There are a lot of hypocrites on this forum.
You called?
>> I break the speed limit every day as I can almost guarantee everyone else does.
I do, but I don't get caught. The fact he got caught shows he had poor observation, and was clearly unfit to drive at that speed.
As also said if you have a wallet full of points you do kinda take some care. If you don't, you clearly don't value your license. Take it away from them.
|
>> I don't get caught.
You will, one day.
|
>> >> I don't get caught.
>>
>> You will, one day.
>>
Probably by something like the unmarked AUDI A6 3.0TDI with the very discrete blue LEDs at the bottom of the rear window I was stopped behind at traffic lights this afternoon. I could just see the top of the drivers two way radio over his shoulder and non standard kit on the dashboard.
Last edited by: Old Navy on Wed 23 Feb 11 at 18:33
|
|
I'm confident Zero will talk his way out of it... ;-)
|
|
you wont believe how good I am at passing the attitude test.
|
|
Yeah, probably will. And it will be my own fault and I will deserve it.
|
HaHaHa !
So then, nobody has driven at 31mph or 41 mph in their respective zones or done 80mph on the motorway today ?
Because if you did, you are a criminal and according to some on here you are an idiot.
Everybody exceeds the speed limit at some point, I know it and you know it.
|
"Everybody exceeds the speed limit at some point, I know it and you know it."
Totally agree MrTee.Everybody goes over the speed limit.Fact. But its by how much that matters.32 in a 30(we all do it) but 45 in a 30 is obviously flouting the law and needs to be punished.
|
Agreed, but where do you draw the line.
Empty motorway, 2am, dry, good visibility, why not 100mph ?
In a modern car or bike, it's easy and safe and maybe the hand wringers should remember that the 70mph limit was brought in as a temporary measure, way back when cars were rubbish with drum brakes and crossply tyres and recirculating ball steering.
Equally 30mph is too much on some roads at certain times and conditions.
Lets face it, some people should not be driving anything with an engine as they have the ability of...(insert your favourite derogatory term here)
|
>> Agreed, but where do you draw the line.
>>
>> Empty motorway, 2am, dry, good visibility, why not 100mph ?
No reason.
Empty Motorway, 2am, dry, good visibility, Police car you didn't spot.
Empty Motorway, 2am, dry, good visibility, camera you didnt notice.
There is your line.
As I said, If you get caught you were not safe to speed.
|
Police car at that time ? virtually no chance.
Cameras ? not any on the motorway near me and in any case, these days we know where they all are, don't we.
Off topic, remember the tale of patrol cars playing "snooker" with cars a few years ago, well a reliable source told me it's true.
|
>> Police car at that time ? virtually no chance.
>>
>> Cameras ? not any on the motorway near me and in any case, these days
>> we know where they all are, don't we.
Then you wont get caught will you, and its not a problem.
>> Off topic, remember the tale of patrol cars playing "snooker" with cars a few years
>> ago, well a reliable source told me it's true.
To catch you they need to see you, if they can see you, you should be able to see them
No game.
Your snooker theory falls to bits tho, how many pink cars were there?
|
>> Your snooker theory falls to bits tho, how many pink cars were there?
>>
Loads - any Ford or Vauxhall over about 7 years old which was originally painted red! :-)
|
>> Agreed, but where do you draw the line.
[(Speed Limit +10%) + 2 mph]
Do I win a cookie ?
|
|
i lost the will to post when the white ball went down the hole.... :-(
|
|
Why anyone would willingly be seen in anything the colour of a dog's 'lipstick' is beyond me.
|
|
Oh I forgot to mention, The A6 I mentioned earlier moved off and trundled along a city street at 35 mph. :-)
|
>> ...You may feel like you're making progress, but you're not....
>>
>> Very good point, but magistrates seem to be taken in by the excuse more often
>> than not.
>>
Everybody is taken in. That's why they make cars capable of going over 70 mph, and why people buy them.
Of course it's utterly pointless, a waste of money, oil, time. But there is a gigantic conspiracy to pretend that it is important. The reason is that cars are a status symbol, and only useful for getting from A to B as a secondary factor.
|
"The reason is that cars are a status symbol, and only useful for getting from A to B as a secondary factor"
Might be for you, but for most people they are essential transport. Of course most people look for a style that suits them and why not.
It,s a bit like clothes, we choose what we like otherwise we would all wear sacks.
|
Hardship Hearings..good or bad? - hobby
