![[TW]Fox](/data/man-of-honor/2009.png){kind=avatar}
Last edited:
104 on the motorway.
- Thread starter DM
- Start date
OMG I've been making that point right through the thread!!!! I even said '12k' in the post you replied to!!!
cool story bro
Permabanned
- Joined
- 25 Oct 2004
- Posts
- 9,078
I once got scared out of my wits because I thought I had been flashed, nothing came of it though.
But now adays if im on the motorway I set cruise to 70mph and leave it at that. No point risking my license.
But now adays if im on the motorway I set cruise to 70mph and leave it at that. No point risking my license.
4 figures?
I agree with Fox, the main deterrent for me is the punishment. I was caught speeding back in March and given 3 points and a £60 fine and that plus the slight insurance premium increase annoyed me enough to act as a deterrent, and as a result I slow down to nearer 50 when the M3 becomes the A316 now
But I also believe that the law is there for a reason. 100+ on a busy motorway is asking for a pileup. 100+ on an empty motorway at 3am when most people's bodies (and consequently reaction and judgement times) are feeling more tired than they would be during the day in most case, and things could still get nasty. It's more difficult to judge a car's distance and closing speed at night when you look in your mirrors - you're looking at blurred lights in the distance versus a clearly visible large metal object during the day, it only takes one perhaps less-experienced teenage girl for instance driving home from uni to pull out a bit too close in front of the person doing 100+ for that person to panic, perhaps swerve a bit violently, and oh dear..
It also uses a lot more fuel than doing 70-75 so you save a bit of money too
[TW]Fox;17015508 said:
the figures i gave them supported i could have paid a £300 fine.
THey chose not to fine me that because i got a ban.
Lopez got fined £270 but with 6 points instead of a ban. If they ban you instead of points you get a much lower fine. its that simple !
nothing to do with being on the breadline.
Permabanned
- Joined
- 4 Jun 2010
- Posts
- 829
[TW]Fox;17015617 said:
LOL.
I do get your point though, and its a valid one...
If someone cant look after their own finances, then why should the court be expected to assume responsibilty for keeping them "afloat" by mitigating the impact on their family, when thats really up to the person concerned.
However this is Britain, and no one seems to take responsibility for anything, ever!
It is fairer to punish on a sliding scale though I believe, ultimately the fines are another tax lets be honest.
What does annoy me even more is the "but what if" brigade.
You can punish based on what if's. Sure doing 150mph might be a fraction more dangerous, but its not like people are cruising at these speeds. More often than not its only for a few seconds, nothing will happen, no one will even notice, and the world continues to turn. Yet you have people posting about things getting "nasty" and "pile ups" etc etc. These are the people I think that have fallen for the media spin and political demonisation of ANYTHING approching FUN.
Some people here have probably done close to 200mph on a public road... Where are the bodies? Where is the terrible cost of this heinous and disgusting crime?!
The points system should be scrapped, and people should move on to an increasing fine system like the US.
Last edited:
Associate
- Joined
- 18 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 940
- Location
- Manchester
A quick tip for those with a ban, if you shop around, some insurance companies only ask for the offence code sp30/50 and dont ask any more details!
In my head the main deterrent is the punishment, but I speed anyway, so it can't be effective. I guess then the main deterrent is getting caught - I slow when I know I will. I had 9 pts on a 200hp+ RWD car from age 20, so I know all about annoying insurance premiums. However, the fact remains that I can earn more money to pay for those insurance premiums. I'd say the bigger threat was losing my license, but I didn't significantly slow down when I knew that one more incident would see me hit 12 pts and lose my license under totting up rules.I agree with Fox, the main deterrent for me is the punishment. I was caught speeding back in March and given 3 points and a £60 fine and that plus the slight insurance premium increase annoyed me enough to act as a deterrent, and as a result I slow down to nearer 50 when the M3 becomes the A316 now
I think what would see me slow down is the abolition of speed limits. I have a rebellious nature, and do not like being restricted when it cannot be proven that it is necessary. I have never seen or heard a scientific or logical justification for 70 on the M40 when it is clear, and so I do not respect that limit. I will overtake police cars at a GPS 75 because I know that no officer can be bothered to stop me for that. I drive at a GPS 55 through 50 SPECS limits because I know I can get away with that; I carefully calculate the indicated speed that I can drive at - in the Mondeo I measured that I could drive at an indicated 58.5, a point where the needle did not touch the white mark indicating 60. I speed up and follow police cars that are on call, to see how fast they are going. I've followed them for a while at over 120 no more than some car lengths behind. In hindsight it's lunacy, but I feel compelled to push the boundaries. It's not arrogance - I don't do it because I think I'm better. I do it because I think the limits are rubbish.
I think the law is there because it's there. Look at the history of speed limits in this country - they aren't set using detailed studies or fact, they are set mostly arbitrarily. Additionally, they are arbitrarily set based on the performance of vehicles a very long time ago. The 70 limit was intended to be temporary due to fog (70 in fog was considered fine for the 50s relics that were still milling around), and was introduced in 1965 - a time when the top speed of a vehicle was usually about 70! Sure, people's reaction times are still the same today as they were then (though I wouldn't be surprised if they were slightly faster - we have better coffee nowadays), but the performance and safety of motor vehicles has increased hugely. The braking distance of the average family car in 1965 is much longer than in 2010, without mentioning now standard driving aids such as ABS, and soon to be standard ESC, that all massively increase the reality with which the average person can manoeuvre a vehicle at high speed in an emergency. I'd imagine that if, in 1965, someone was driving along in their Riley RME at 70, just 5 MPH below it's absolute maximum speed, and had to brake and swerve in an emergency, it would be game over. The car would probably explode and roll raining death and destruction upon all those near. Today, many cars are not long out of 2nd gear at 70, and are able to brake and corner at that speed without serious risk of randomly losing control.
When you combine the huge amount of grip a modern road car has with the far more powerful brakes, firmer suspension, thick roll bars, ABS, ESC, TPM etc., together with the fact there's little scientific basis to the existing limits, I think the argument for 70 on a motorway is beginning to fade away. I would be happy with no limits and far more onus being placed on the driver (with "advisory" speeds on all roads), with lower limits enforced in poor weather conditions. I would happily see a mandatory 50 or whatever on the motorway in very poor weather in return for an autobahn-esque unlimited speed in good conditions.
I want limits based on evidence and fact, not the latest statistical skullduggery mashed together by the speed nazis.
Last edited:
Caporegime
- Joined
- 20 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 75,995
- Location
- Wish i was in a Ramen Shop Counter
But they didn't have chavs in boyracers back then 
What i am saying that, technically the cars are better, but people are not really smarter, you might be, but the one crashing into you certainly isn't.
What i am saying that, technically the cars are better, but people are not really smarter, you might be, but the one crashing into you certainly isn't.
Then what is the root cause of that problem? It's driver education. Excessive speed is a consequence, not the cause.
4 figures?
Nah, more. Hit the light speed button, managed to beat the Millenium Falcon in a race past Wetherby Services
.Its all a bit depressing aint it.
The whole day out to court and sitting about for hours is getting on my nerves already.
It has certainly been a deterrent for me, not the fine, just the whole stupid package, court, filling in forms, ringing the insurance, i hate all that rubbish.
Im never out at 3am normally, its been 20 years since i last had points, i never bother to speed because its too congested usually when i drive.
So to sum up, if i am out at 3am on an empty motorway again i will be putting the cruise on at 80mph.
Just think all this because my son couldnt get the right ferry bahhh, its his fault.
The whole day out to court and sitting about for hours is getting on my nerves already.
It has certainly been a deterrent for me, not the fine, just the whole stupid package, court, filling in forms, ringing the insurance, i hate all that rubbish.
Im never out at 3am normally, its been 20 years since i last had points, i never bother to speed because its too congested usually when i drive.
So to sum up, if i am out at 3am on an empty motorway again i will be putting the cruise on at 80mph.
Just think all this because my son couldnt get the right ferry bahhh, its his fault.
I see where you're coming from... But think about it.. Can you imagine the potential carnage a delimited motorway would cause? Most people are too stupid to react to hazards at 60/70 let alone higher.
But I don't disagree with the fact the limit should be variable/raised/abolished to some extent, and I'm certainly not trying to come across all SPEED KILLS LOL (find me behind the wheel of my MX5 on some quiet rural B roads and things might be different..) .
Anyway you can "rebel" all you like, I value my license and would rather not waste money unnecessarily on fines and higher insurance premiums
are you actually mentally ill?
Associate
- Joined
- 5 Jul 2007
- Posts
- 1,293
Unless youve got a massive distance to cover that extra 30mph isnt going to make much of a difference. Is getting home a few minutes quicker worth the extra risk and potential cost?