Yep I re-read it and it comes across entirely against a Biker, implying that Biker ride on the wrong side of the road or ride so out of control they hit a lot of trees. This wasn't the "Police Commissioner" it was the actual Chief Inspector a few years ago. Did he put speed cameras or traps on winding twisting roads? No, on large well used A roads usually dual carriage ways. It was so highly criticised as neighbouring Chief Inspectors strongly opposed this stance as nothing more than alienating normal decent motorists. Read up on it, he was an epic c@ck!
I've never really understood the "us versus them" mentality towards the police. The police are there to attempt to uphold the law of the land, which they do with varying degrees of success. Some of them are tits, most are just fine. If you think the law is wrong, you need to start with your local MP and end up in the House of Lords. The rozzers don't get a look in. If people act like c**ts and risk the lives of those acting within the defined boundaries of the law, then they should expect to suffer the consequences if they get caught. When I do over 100mph on the motorway, I am silently and subconsciously accepting the risk that if I overtake an unmarked police car I am likely to be pulled over and issued a stern dressing down at the very least. It doesn't necessarily stop me - some years ago drove back from Gatwick to home never dropping below 120 all the way down the M3, but it was during the early hours and I was itching for my bed.
Are we even really discussing this, Person in question was doing 86 in a 50 zone thats not just speeding thats reckless whatever way you look at it. you can moan and groan all you want to say reasons why its ok we have all done it but the simple facts are this. If you can not do the time or penalty ( which will be a driving ban ) then dont speed simple stuff really. He is also a repeat offender which means he will get the book thrown at him for it. He will likely be looking at a total resit of his drivers licence.
It will be interesting to see what happens. Have spoken to the prat and he won't be fighting what comes his way, he will just take the ban rather. My only problem is, i know he has driven without insurance before, whats to stop him doing it again after his license is revoked.
I have the advantage that my car can't really do 86mph, well, it can, but it takes a while to get there, and long straight roads are required. Slowest car in the world, will hopefully, make sure I don't get 6 points in my first 2 years!
If I were in your shoes and he did that I'd report him. We have enough shitty drivers on the road these days without having unlicensed, uninsured ones on top.
Don't care if he was an "epic c*ck!" it's simple speed limits exist for a reason, so what there making money off those who bend the rules. Law is law after all. Frankly 1 in 5 bikers I see do something utterly nuts, and I have to question there thought process of such actions. I'm not defending motorist here either, the whole thread is about one dickhe@d doing 86mph in a 50 and that is not defensible unless he was outrunning a natural disaster or zombies, at which point the courts have a bigger issue to worry about if it's zombies. I guess you're a biker, one of those good bikers who never breaks the law and always keeps a safe distance from the car in front. The amount of bikers killed because they sit in the blind spot behind a car, and get nailed at junctions by somebody pulling out as a car turns off, is almost hilarious. Hell I've done it when a lorry turned off, Didn't hit the guy he was fecking lucky but he still found cause to give me the finger until I got out a shouted at him for being a tw@t, even the lorry driver stopped and gave him a shouting, and pointed out where he had gone wrong. If your on 2 wheels powered or not most of you live in your own little world of filtering around big death dealing objects, and then complain when you get hurt. F*ck you if your one of these toss*rs. +1 Never had an issue with them, and usually really helpful even if you just need directions Same, if I speed I have already accepted the punishment. No point in bleating and bitching if you get caught. When you press on hard, also expect that the seeming harmless car you're in suddenly has a higher potential for a high speed blow out. It amazes me people just jump in their cars for big journeys without checking the condition of their tyres, so might stop and check tyre pressure but I wouldn't put money on it. I feel really sinister at the garage when checking pressure and tread condition, because I know what I'm planning and at the hours I'll be doing it at.. For instance Cambridgeshire to Cornwall (Distance of 320 miles) late Friday evening after dark in a shade under 3.5hrs including 4 stops for fuel and tyre checks.
If you ever travel up the Horseshoe Pass, you'll find markings along the road, so the Plod can ticket you from the comfort of their helicopter!
Getting tickets for 43 in a 40? Yes that makes him an EPIC C@CK! You can even allow for speedometer variants on that and still come out with 40. 7000 tickets in a month. I guess you're a driver, one of those good drivers who never breaks the law and always keeps a safe distance from the vehicle in front. Yeah I've seen a clearly visible rider on a roundabout at legal speeds go over the bonnet of a car because some tw@t in the car didn't even look properly. If youre on 4 wheels powered or not most of you live in your own little world of filtering around big death dealing objects, and then complain when you get hurt. F*ck you if your one of these toss*rs.
The big question that has to be asked is if our maximum limit in this country is 70mph why are there cars (and pretty much all of them) capable of doing way more than that?
wut? If you're doing 43, your speedo must say 43 or over, so you should expect to get a ticket if you get flashed/stopped in a 40. I don't see the problem? I see your reasoning, but a zero tolerance approach is sometimes the only thing that works effectively - here for example the police will only stop you if people go through a red light that's been red for a few seconds, so a lot of people go though a just red (and more when the police aren't looking) and it's crazy dangerous, and the only thing that's gonna stop people is cameras on the lights.
Actually you would be surprised by the variance. try it next time you are driving with your sat nav on, it's usually within about 3 or 4 mph. Over the many makes of car, some have very accurate speedometer readings, others are way off. Next time you get your car serviced ask the chap or chapette in the garage.
By law, the speedo must always show a greater or equal speed to the speed travelled, so the tollerance built in is always in the plus range.
Legal requirement for a speedo is that it cannot read slower than the actual speed, but is allowed to read up to 10% faster. ie: In that 40 limit, if your speedo reads 40, you could be doing anything from 36-40. re: Bikes. A work colleague on his stationary motorcycle was reversed into by a van driver, climbing over his front wheel & breaking the mudguard. My colleague was having the forks checked for twisting yesterday. Because he wasn't hurt, Plod was totally disinterested.
^ not disinterested, but because that's what insurance is for. Accidents. Most speedos are around 10% "out" 33 is 30, 44 is 40 etc...I have been done for speeding before, if I remember correctly, to get the ticket, I had to have been doing the limit plus 9(?) mph. I was caught doing 39 in a 30, my speedo must have shown around 44mph.
Because of: a) Acceleration, when joining fast moving traffic it's important you get up to speed before the traffic you pulled out in front of can catch you up. Critical at all junctions & slip roads (which are basically junctions) b) Gear ratios. If your top speed was 70mph then you would be red lining the car at that speed. The engine would die within a year, and it would be very unpleasant to hear. c) Some countries, such as Germany and Isle of Man realise that cars can go quite fast safely if the person behind the wheel isn't an idiot. Edit: I realise you could electronically limit the top speed of the car. But then overtakes would be seriously, seriously dangerous. So let's put overtaking as reason d).
Acceleration and gearing wouldn't need to be affected, if I can set my car to 70mph with the cruise control then why can't the same system be used to limit the max speed full stop. It would obviously never be implemented but you can see my reasoning plus it also wouldn't stop someone from doing 70 in a 30. Soz missed your edit. As for overtaking...just because someone is overtaking doesn't make it legal to exceed the limit!!
Lets say you pull out from behind a caravan, thinking you have a clear road. Turns out for whatever reason you are wrong, you are now sat alongside the caravan at 70 without the option to floor it and get back onto your side of the road. Not going to be pretty...
If a caravan is doing 70, why would you need to overtake? Also, If you're both abiding by the law, and both doing seventy, then you're on a dual carriage way or a motorway, so overtaking is a non issue, since single lane roads the national speed limit is actually sixty, not seventy...
