Speed Cameras

Rotty · 5 Feb 2007 at 23:54

mortuzac said:
a clean licence....... don't u mean without the 3 points?

well if you already have points though I think you have to have a clean licence to be offered the course ( or at least in relation to speeding )

Dashik · 5 Feb 2007 at 23:58

Rotty said:
they may choose to offer it you , if you do you pay a course fee ( usually the same as the fine - £60 ) , you go along and be lectured for a few hours the you go home with a clean licence

I taught the driver improvement course up here in scotland with BSM and if I recall it was actually £200 or £300 for a 2 day course. 1/2 day classroom session followed by 1 1/2 days driving assesment/coaching and observation of improvement. If the attitude and driving had not improved we would not sign off on the course and they went back to court. Also even when we did sign off on the candiate they go on a register for 2 years and if they commit another traffic offense in that period they got the original considered as well.

Not sure how its run in england but I heard its pretty much the same thing.

Amazing how peoples attitude changed in the car when you point out the risk attatched to some of the habits they had developed. 90% of people agreed and showed significant positive improvement. Most of the other 10% failed to turn up in the first place............

mortuzac · 5 Feb 2007 at 23:59

Oh thanks for the info rotty.....

I must admit I am an evil serial criminal of the highest order ( according to some of the posts here ).... i have points on my licence........

I'm glad though that some of you share my point of view..

ps how do you add quotes to messages?

Dashik · 5 Feb 2007 at 23:59

Rotty said:
well if you already have points though I think you have to have a clean licence to be offered the course ( or at least in relation to speeding )

Not true in Scotland at least, usually it depended on the offence (Not a hope with drink driving for instance) but sometimes people were offered the course as a way of avoiding a ban if they showed improvement. Then on the register for 2 years probation etc.

Morba · 6 Feb 2007 at 00:00

Dashik said:
I taught the driver improvement course up here in scotland with BSM and if I recall it was actually £200 or £300 for a 2 day course.

£60 for 4 hours or so down here, its an involvement course, classroom based.

Dashik · 6 Feb 2007 at 00:03

Morba said:
£60 for 4 hours or so down here, its an involvement course, classroom based.

Not that involving if it does not actually involve any driving lol, Surely the Scottish system is ahead for a change

We actually do a risk assesment and then try and improve the candiates driving.

You can talk all day about why you should not do this or that but the best method is to get them driving and point out the risks in what they do and get them on side if you follow me.

Morba · 6 Feb 2007 at 00:11

Dashik said:
Not that involving if it does not actually involve any driving lol, Surely the Scottish system is ahead for a change We actually do a risk assesment and then try and improve the candiates driving.

You can talk all day about why you should not do this or that but the best method is to get them driving and point out the risks in what they do and get them on side if you follow me.

its usually only given to people who are under 38mph in a 30 (but over 30 obviously). They are only looking to get a 10% reduction in average speed across peoples standard driving speed, to make a significant reduction in the driving areas that they are concerned about.

the sort of course that you do would be offered to people who are a lot worse than someone being flashed at 35/36 mph imo.
Im sure there is a driver improvement course that drink drivers can go on, which will lower the ban time.

Dashik · 6 Feb 2007 at 00:18

Morba said:
its usually only given to people who are under 38mph in a 30 (but over 30 obviously). They are only looking to get a 10% reduction in average speed across peoples standard driving speed, to make a significant reduction in the driving areas that they are concerned about.

the sort of course that you do would be offered to people who are a lot worse than someone being flashed at 35/36 mph imo.
Im sure there is a driver improvement course that drink drivers can go on, which will lower the ban time.

Like I said I know its a little different 'down south' (Strange bunch you southerners anyways

)

As for who gets the course I think its one option up here and the adi adjusts to suit to the individual drivers.

I've had people who jumped a red light, ran a lorry under a low bridge, pulled out in front of another car or just plain speeding etc.

OpenToSuggestions · 6 Feb 2007 at 00:28

the police are just after more revenue. Getting caught is just bad luck. Obviously if your being an a boy racer and doing 40 in 30 or 70 in 50 then you deserve to get busted. my dad was caught in a 40 zone as he was speeding up to a 60 zone which was about 20metres ahead of him by a man with a gun stood right behind the sign which i think is just plain petty. Im all up for them standing outside schools or on areas where people race novas and corsas

ive been driving over a year and havnt been caught speeding, I will be one day though as everyone speeds.

Dashik · 6 Feb 2007 at 00:33

mglover070588 said:
everyone speeds.

NOT true.

OpenToSuggestions · 6 Feb 2007 at 00:39

Dashik said:
NOT true.

im sure youve wandered over 70 on the motorway before

Dashik · 6 Feb 2007 at 00:40

mglover070588 said:
the police are just after more revenue.

Heres a radical thought, maybe, just maybe there sick of scraping up bodies and informing the relatives?

The other weekend 15 people died on Scotlands roads and I know of a least on accident where from what I can gather (I may be wrong) a corsa driven by a 19 year old male with 2 20 year old female passengers was involved in a collison with a Civic with a 66 year old male and his wife with there 33 year old son. ALL of them died.

The police with the help of the public managed to get the driver of the corsa out of the overturned on fire vehicle. They were unable to help the two girls. Lets hope they died on impact and did not burn to death (and I dont mean by smoke inhalation) The occupants of the civic were all dead. This happened on or about a blind summit near Perth and speed was a factor in the outcome. Who do you think was most likely to blame?

Dashik · 6 Feb 2007 at 00:43

mglover070588 said:
im sure youve wandered over 70 on the motorway before

Thats not relevant, your statement is not true, Not everyone speeds.

Oh and I do not agree with the speed kills campaign either. Its lack of driver education and over estimation of there skills that kills.

The_Dark_Side · 6 Feb 2007 at 00:45

mortuzac said:
Should I just pay the fine or should I point this out to the cheif constable?

i'm sure that reminding the Chief Constable of the legal standpoint will get you some extra leniency

OpenToSuggestions · 6 Feb 2007 at 00:46

mglover070588 said:
Obviously if your being an a boy racer and doing 40 in 30 or 70 in 50 then you deserve to get busted.

im all for idiots getting fined and banned i just dont agree with some of the methods the police use. If you're caught by a static camera then the driver cannot have even been looking at the road as there are camera signs, marks on the road and the cameras are yellow and reflective.

It was actually rectified on top gear though, that in some places speed cameras casue more accidents, as people are spending their time staring at the speedo on the dash and looking in trees etc for cameras than looking at the road. no joke it really was on tv. I know when i see a camera i slow down to 25mph when ina 30zone, and even though I try not to im staring at the speedo

Dashik · 6 Feb 2007 at 00:49

Well my pupils all manage to drive at the limit when safe and dont have to stare at the speedo so how come you cant? If you have a habit of glancing at the speedo every 5 secs or so then your unlikely to get caught speeding, unless of course you chose to speed.

The_Dark_Side · 6 Feb 2007 at 00:52

Dashik said:
Well my pupils all manage to drive at the limit when safe and dont have to stare at the speedo so how come you cant? If you have a habit of glancing at the speedo every 5 secs or so then your unlikely to get caught speeding, unless of course you chose to speed.

that's a ridiculous suggestion and impossible to do.
everyone knows that when approaching a camera the only way to stay under the limit is to spend 9/10ths of every second staring at the speedo.

the only other way to do it would be to develop some form of throttle control and actually be able to hold your vehicle at a constant speed.
like that's possible lol.

BenST · 6 Feb 2007 at 00:56

mortuzac said:
I was under the impression that they only prosecuted people who travel faster than 10% plus 2mph than the spped limit.

This equates to speeds of 47mph and over.

lukechad said:
10%+2 is 46 :/

Rotty said:
what you are referring to is the ACPO recommendation which is 10% + 2

which is 46 btw :

No, the OP is right. He said speeds faster than the guideline which would be => 47mph.

iCraig said:
You should just pay the fine. You got caught speeding so take it on the chin like a man instead of trying to worm your way out of it.

Bes said:
I think you should stop trying to be a weasel and take it like a man.

I find comments like the above extremely rude and condecending. He got caught doing 47 in a 40, hardly a major crime and he was just looking for a way to get out of it. I would too, if I thought there was a possibility of getting away with a stupid punishment then I'd persue any avenue available and that would include asking on a public forum. Hardly 'worming his way out of it', Jeez....

OpenToSuggestions · 6 Feb 2007 at 00:57

Dashik said:
Well my pupils all manage to drive at the limit when safe and dont have to stare at the speedo so how come you cant? If you have a habit of glancing at the speedo every 5 secs or so then your unlikely to get caught speeding, unless of course you chose to speed.

when I was a learner I always had 50 cars up my ass cos I was doing 30 in a 30.

But I personally don't think 47 in a 40 is majorly bad. if i were the passenger to the guy in question I would be thinking what a maniac. Anyone who claims that they dont speed ever must still be a learner with an instructer

mortuzac · 6 Feb 2007 at 00:58

Why is speed to blame in the scotland case. I'm sure it's down to drink, drugs or just driver stupidity.

I've been driving for over 20 years and I have never crashed ( or caused anyone else to crash )

I think too that cameras cause more accidents. I personally prefer those signs that warn you that you're travelling over the speed limit. I respect them more, infact I'm sure that more people respect those things than speed cameras.

It's just another stealth tax imo.