Safe Speed Forums

@ Yimi,
Don't feed the troll mate

@ Steve (the Admin)
Add an ignore button to the forum, or fuck him off out of it mate......he's here to stir shit.

_________________
What makes you think I'm drunk officer, have I got a fat bird with me?

Nope, it was only merely an example. I could have used DCs too. Don’t forget, these are where the safest drivers are most likely to feel hard done by if caught.


They don't need to; remember the boy racer?
For me, anyone exceeding limits by an amount that truly is detrimental is a boy racer.


No such claim has been made. Check your facts please.


That applies to residential areas, which I agree with; I'm also negatively affected by boy racers and joyriders. Did you already forget the technical infringements I was referring to was relating to motorways (and now DCs and other low hazards roads)? Residents are not annoyed by those who do so in non-residential areas.


And how does that compare to the national long-term trend? I mean, over a baseline of over 15 years ...
These changes occur in urban environment where it is likely to have additional and unrelated safety measures put in place in that time (bias on selection). So what?


Risk compensation: 'failing to look properly'!


Ah, a political reason for setting limits instead of safety. I've never been a fan of 'pushing instead of pulling'


Are you talking about RCGB2007? Seriously? You fail big time there!
All you had to do was Google it (top hit)


My figures are taken from the DfT RCGB2007 (page 44), this report the first and final word in the statistical compilation analysis of UK casualties. Everything else is derived (and misrepresented) from this. Does data from the likes of the BBC trump that from the DfT:


I've already directly addressed how that 26% figure is misleading. Why do you outright dismiss my explanation without any acknowledgement, yet continue to quote from sources who get their information from sources who also misrepresent? How is that not the height of disingenuous behaviour?

"You see, what they did was mix other speed related contributory factors, such as "failure to judge the speed or path" into the group "speed is a factor", then misspoke (a la Hilary Clinton) the words to include 'excessive' - even though excessive speed (however it is defined) had nothing to do with these other factors."

None of this topic drift detracts from the very wrong principle of robbing Peter to Pay Paul for Patrick's crime!

_________________
Views expressed are personal opinions and are not necessarily shared by the Safe Speed campaign

In my area they have been able to set aside a room specifically for interviewing rape and domestic violence victims. The room is decorated and furnished like a home and not like a police station. I accept that a lot of the cash will have come from motorists who have never raped or attacked anybody but the perpetrators of such offences go to jail where they are not able to contribute financially to such things.

The above should not be taken as either in favour of the VS or against it, just as an example of where some of the money is going.

_________________
I am not a lawyer and can't give legal advice. I do have experience of the day to day working of courts and use that knowledge to help where possible. I do not represent any official body and post as an individual.

I can assure you that ACPO guidelines are, if not ignored, then not complied with on many occasions. They are guidelines NOT rules or law. If you look around the various motoring forums you will find many cases of this. Pepipoo would be a good place to start. As would your local magistrates court on their motoring day.

That said, I have never seen a prosecution for 31 MPH in a 30 or higher limit in all the years I been hearing motoring cases.

_________________
I am not a lawyer and can't give legal advice. I do have experience of the day to day working of courts and use that knowledge to help where possible. I do not represent any official body and post as an individual.

Verifiable.

Anecdote.

Still waiting.

I'm confused, you think rape victims should be interviewed in squalor? And, yet again, this is an unattributed, unverifiable anecdote.

Well, 2,000,000 * £15 annually should about cover that, and then some; but, where will the money actually go?

This stinks doesn't it. Others are being made to pay for the crimes, really bad crimes, of others. Leaving the FPN surcharge issue for a moment, to me this is further indication that criminal rehabilitation system really is in tatters - the guilty don't pay for their crimes (motorists of the non joyriding or boyracer variety are usually insured), yet are given free bed and board (where they can still get their phones, and high) generously paid for by the rest of us - if they're actually caught - and if they're put away.

I say we resurrect Workhouses from these serious criminals. Let me run them, I don't need 100k per year per place, 100 quid will do fine!

_________________
Views expressed are personal opinions and are not necessarily shared by the Safe Speed campaign

Yimi has alleged dishonesty and told a bare-faced lie. Your post adds nothing whatsoever and is just foul-mouthed abuse, it's been reported.

Your evidence, please, that the only speeders who impact negatively on others are boy racers or car thieves please.

Fourth time.

Strawman!

_________________
Views expressed are personal opinions and are not necessarily shared by the Safe Speed campaign

Why did you quote my post, then not address it? What was the purpose of that?

Granted I have no evidence, but I believe it is a commonly held notion by those who have considered this at any depth, simply because I can't see how it can be otherwise viewed.
You are free to try to show otherwise. Remember we're talking about those who get residents to be "annoyed, threatened and intimidated "

_________________
Views expressed are personal opinions and are not necessarily shared by the Safe Speed campaign

In order for me to join this argument in a cogent manner could one of you please give me the definition of "boy racer"

_________________
When I see an adult on a bicycle, I do not despair for the future of the human race. H.G. Wells
When I see a youth in a motor car I do d.c.brown

Steve Garrod, are you from SARTU?

_________________
Regulation without education merely creates more criminals.

For me that's easy: In our context, it is someone who drives in a manner, especially exceed the speed limit, in a manner that annoys, threatens and intimidates residents, or other road users. Someone who accidentally creeps over the limit isn't one.

Or if you look at Wiki, "A young man who drives recklessly fast, now especially as associated with [gatherings of car-culture enthusiasts] or illegal street racing".

_________________
Views expressed are personal opinions and are not necessarily shared by the Safe Speed campaign

Bit of a circular argument then.

_________________
When I see an adult on a bicycle, I do not despair for the future of the human race. H.G. Wells
When I see a youth in a motor car I do d.c.brown

I couldn't give a toss whether you reported it or not to be honest, you've been here 5 minutes and talked shite non stop.
Feel free to report this as well

_________________
What makes you think I'm drunk officer, have I got a fat bird with me?

Arguing a point that hasn't been raised and nit-picking irrelevant fact - where have we seen this arguing style before?

I note SteveGarrod condemns speeders, however because one won't get prosecuted for doing 31 in a 30 that is OK even though it is speeding. Circular logic is great isn't it? So speeding is both good and bad, glad we sorted that one out.

How? All I see is equivalence, not logical steps.
Regardless, I believe the differentiation of those who accidentally creep over the limit to those who wantonly do so and annoy, threaten and intimidate residents (or other road users) it's enough to continue the debate, no?

_________________
Views expressed are personal opinions and are not necessarily shared by the Safe Speed campaign

A neighbour regularly drives too fast up our street - not over the limit, but far too fast considering there are children who play out on the street.
If we can prove he is a danger, and get him convicted with video evidence, will we all get £15?

What about the neighbours of the woman who has just been locked up for having noisy sex despite an ASBO against her making antisocial noises - will they all get £15?

No of course not! It will go towards paying a few more expenses for MP's.

_________________
Time to take responsibility for our actions.. and don't be afraid of speaking out!

The BCR cited above made no such distinction and neither do I. I couldn't care less if the car is stolen or does not fit your peculiar definition, if it is speeding then the empirical evidence offered means it is annoying, intimidating and harrassing residents. You're splitting hairs.