Done For Speeding

[TW]Fox · 10 May 2007 at 10:00

See I think you should drive as fast as you feel safe but when you get nicked, take the fine and shut up. Crying, bitching and whinging about how important your license is and how it was deserted apart from all the cars on it is totally pointless.

You cruised at over 100mph. You got nicked. Life sucks, doesn't it? Thats all there is too it.

flump · 10 May 2007 at 10:02

[TW]Fox said:
You cruised at over 100mph. You got nicked. Life sucks, doesn't it? Thats all there is too it.

Fireskull · 10 May 2007 at 10:02

[TW]Fox said:
See I think you should drive as fast as you feel safe but when you get nicked, take the fine and shut up. Crying, bitching and whinging about how important your license is and how it was deserted apart from all the cars on it is totally pointless.

You cruised at over 100mph. You got nicked. Life sucks, doesn't it? Thats all there is too it.

I actually agree with you

Mr_White · 10 May 2007 at 10:02

flump said:
Wrong - where did I mention morals?.

flump said:
How did your amazing intellect derive that I thought it was unacceptable due to safety shrelock?

Right there, if it's not safety, then it's morals.

Well done on never having broken any law in your entire life.

Dogbreath · 10 May 2007 at 10:04

Dangerous Dave said:
After a little reading up there is upto a 5% fudge factor which means depending on how the US Government feel can lead to a speed 5% out, generally speaking the don't use the full 5%. Of course the US government can take out the fudge factor for there use. Also how many roads are flat........

If you are talking about Selective Availability, the US disabled it in 2000 so that's no longer an issue (though they could have course re-enable it at some point).

carpmaster · 10 May 2007 at 10:04

Bug One said:
However when you're sitting on a sports bike in beautiful sunshine on a long straight 4 lane motorway with a bit of a downwards slope and no traffic in front of you, I can assure you that 116 is just pootling along.

Yup I maintain that the same goes for those of us who have high performance cars & spend thousands modifying & keeping them maintained.

You really have to keep an eye on the speedo because 80 or 116 feels pretty much the same from inside the car (except you start wondering why everyone else is driving so slowly then realise & slow down a bit).

flump · 10 May 2007 at 10:07

Mr_White said:
Right there, if it's not safety, then it's morals.

What about it being stupid, inconsiderate, uneconomical and all the other potential factors?

Mr_White said:
Well done on never having broken any law in your entire life.

Lets just say I never broke one by such a large margin

Hawk Tuah · 10 May 2007 at 10:09

[TW]Fox said:
See I think you should drive as fast as you feel safe but when you get nicked, take the fine and shut up. Crying, bitching and whinging about how important your license is and how it was deserted apart from all the cars on it is totally pointless.

You cruised at over 100mph. You got nicked. Life sucks, doesn't it? Thats all there is too it.

I agree, and thats exactly what I'm doing.

Do you really need to put it quite so bluntly though. You 'speak' as if you're fed up of having to read about it. You know no one is forcing you to stick your oar in.

I'm sure the OP is just as nervous as I was right after I was nicked and it is useful and quite a releif to just discuss it with some people who have been in the same situation.

Mr_White · 10 May 2007 at 10:10

flump said:
What about it being stupid, inconsiderate, uneconomical and all the other potential factors?

Clutching at non-existent straws?

flump said:
Lets just say I never broke one by such a large margin

Yeah and of course margins are applicable to every law.

Hawk Tuah · 10 May 2007 at 10:12

flump said:
What about it being ... uneconomical

Can you imagine a law against driving uneconomically.

Your 4x4 is guzzling too much fuel sir. That'll be a £30 fine and 3 points.

Sonea Fifer · 10 May 2007 at 10:14

needmorespeed said:
I didn't think you could get a Ban, points and a fine I thought you could only get two of them

Dangerous Dave said:
they flung the book at him pretty much. A 6 month ban, a £300 fine and 6 points..

Would'nt appear that way

Fireskull · 10 May 2007 at 10:15

Bug One said:
Can you imagine a law against driving uneconomically. Your 4x4 is guzzling too much fuel sir. That'll be a £30 fine and 3 points.

heh i wudnt laugh

[TW]Fox · 10 May 2007 at 10:16

Bug One said:
Do you really need to put it quite so bluntly though.

It's a blunt issue to be honest - most people who come on here having a right old whinge - how DARE the police stop them for doing 200mph on the M1 in their Mclaren F1 - need some bluntness

Hawk Tuah · 10 May 2007 at 10:17

Sonea Fifer said:
Would'nt appear that way

I think that was in Scotland. They're a lot stricted on their speeding.

The OP's got the same things going for him that I have. 10 years driving without any points etc and no additional charge for dangerous driving.

Whilst I'm prepared for the worst, I'm expecting between 6 points and a £300 fine to a 28 day ban and a £500 fine. C'est la vie.

InvaderGIR · 10 May 2007 at 10:21

Bug One said:
Can you imagine a law against driving uneconomically. Your 4x4 is guzzling too much fuel sir. That'll be a £30 fine and 3 points.

They've effectivly done that with the road tax

InvG

Sirrel Squirrel · 10 May 2007 at 10:30

You might get away with points and a large fine, my mate got caught speeding twice in his first 2 years of driving and that usually means 6 points = ban but he went to court over the 2nd fine and said that the company he was working for was expanding and he needed his licence to ensure he could manage the expansion effectively (he's a fitter for a blind shop). He got off with no points and a £100 fine.

edit/ saying that, he was only doing about 40mph in a 30, unlike you, you child killing monster at 30 over the limit

flump · 10 May 2007 at 10:30

Mr_White said:
Clutching at non-existent straws?

Yeah and of course margins are applicable to every law.

Maybe i'll explicitly specifiy tongue in cheek to prove a point.

So lets hear you defence on 104mph in a 70mph limit then.

Better still lets hear you defence on 104mph in a 70mph limit being clocked by the traffic police and them thinking it's a waste of their time to stop him.

You don't just need to convince me though....

[TR]SweetSpotOz · 10 May 2007 at 10:37

barnettgs · 10 May 2007 at 11:06

djcj said:
He had been following me for some time without me realising, i saw a pair of headlights behind me, but due to it being so dark I didn't know it was a police car until he finally put his blue lights on.

If I were you, I won't be comfortable in speeding with unknown car behind me especially at nights.

You were speeding of over 100mph, knowing that you would lose job if you got caught? :confused:

InvaderGIR · 10 May 2007 at 11:12

markyp23 said:
104mph lowest average means you deserve to lose your license to be honest.

Why? He didn't crash, the road was empty (

) and he wasn't doingn it sideways. Obviously I don't know how competant a driver the OP is, and I don't know if he was crusing at 100+ steadily in his lane or using att 3 lanes of the motorway.

To be honest, if he was driving sensibly albeit over the speed limit (by a long way) it's not so bad as someone driving erratically at say 30 in a 70.

I'd have thought he'd lose his license though, my brother got done at 96, got 6 points (I think), a court apperance and a large fine. Afterall it's the OP's fault that he was doing more than the limit, so nobody else can be blamed and he can't really shift it with 'I have to drive to work', as already has been said they'll just say 'you should have thought about that before you started speeding!'.

Everytime I've been involved with the police, I've admitted I've been in the wrong if I have been, as there is no point in denying it, and sometimes nice police officers let you off a little bit.

InvG