Safe Speed Forums

The campaign for genuine road safety
It is currently Sat Nov 07, 2026 15:44

All times are UTC [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 31 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Fri May 29, 2009 21:45 
Offline
User
User avatar

Joined: Mon Mar 08, 2004 21:41
Posts: 3608
Location: North West
Well they are! You like them. "Wide boys1" They have hearts of gold... but we all know the score of safety and COAST values all the same..
Quote:


http://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/ ... was_banned

Crash biker was banned
John Scheerhout

May 29, 2009

A MOTORCYCLIST who died after he ploughed into a woman on a pedestrian crossing was banned from the roads.

It has emerged that Joe McCann was disqualified from driving until October 2010.

He had also been arrested twice on suspicion of driving while disqualified in 2003.

Mr McCann, 25, the father of a six-year-old boy, was riding a 1,000cc Suzuki on Victoria Avenue, Blackley, on Saturday night.

The bike hit the pedestrian as she was on the crossing outside a primary school before crashing into parked cars.

The woman remains in hospital with a number of broken bones in her arms and legs - but her injuries are not thought to be life-threatening.

He just shouldn't have been on that bike at all because he was a banned driver

Police source
Since the tragedy, a huge floral tribute to Mr McCann, who was about to become a father for the second time, has been laid near the scene of the accident.

A police source said: "Of course, This is a terrible tragedy. But he just shouldn't have been on that bike at all because he was a banned driver. The woman he hit is in a terrible state. It's more a case of what bones she hasn't broken."

Friends have paid tribute to Mr McCann on the social networking website Facebook.

Lauren Wilds wrote: "Many people are devastated about your death Joe. You made me smile every time you walked in the room. I just wish I could've said goodbye.

"My sympathy goes out to all your family and friends. It's heartbreaking that you had to be taken away even though you are a decent, top lad with his own businesses, a six-year-old son, and a kid on the way. You had so much to live for."

Susan Flynn paid tribute to 'one of the most gorgeous blue-eyed boys' who was 'so suddenly taken away', adding that she was thinking about Joe's son and 'baby on the way'.

Martin Phoenix wrote: "I grew up with Joe. He was one of my best friends growing up.

He was just a great mate and my heart goes out to all his loved ones."

Toni Goss said: "Rest in Peace Joe, you have been reunited with your dad but that doesn't stop the pain everyone is feeling here."

Anyone with information about the collision is asked to call 0161 856 3572.




OK so he was likeable. So :censored: what. He was illegal .. had no right to be riding a bike or driving a car. He was not insured.


I do not sodding well care if a "nice chap" NICEchaps do not normally endanger nor kill other people So sorry if I say f:censored:g not nice chap. I appreciate those who knew him liked him. But sorry .. I do not know him and I know he broke the law and injured an innocent who will have to claim compo from the MIB and ultimately from ME AND THEE on here.. so NO .. I cannot come to same conclusion. I may hope his soul rests in peace .. but I will not be lighting any candles for him.

_________________
If you want to get to heaven - you have to raise a little hell!

Smilies are contagious
They are just like the flu
We use our smilies on YOU today
Now Good Causes are smiling too!

KEEP SMILING
It makes folk wonder just what you REALLY got up to last night!

Smily to penny.. penny to pound
safespeed prospers-smiles all round! !

But the real message? SMILE.. GO ON ! DO IT! and the world will smile with you!
Enjoy life! You only have the one bite at it.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Fri May 29, 2009 22:00 
Offline
Gold Member
Gold Member
User avatar

Joined: Wed Dec 08, 2004 14:26
Posts: 4364
Location: Hampshire/Wiltshire Border
Quote:
The bike hit the pedestrian as she was on the crossing outside a primary school before crashing into parked cars.

This says it all really. Crossing, school, parking, pedestrian - and still he hit her.

_________________
Malcolm W.
The views expressed in this post are personal opinions and do not represent the views of Safespeed.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Sat May 30, 2009 08:26 
Offline
Life Member
Life Member
User avatar

Joined: Sun Sep 25, 2005 21:17
Posts: 3734
Location: Dorset/Somerset border
If he's a nice guy, I'd hate to meet a nasty one.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Sat May 30, 2009 09:26 
Offline
User

Joined: Wed Nov 09, 2005 21:10
Posts: 1693
malcolmw wrote:
Quote:
The bike hit the pedestrian as she was on the crossing outside a primary school before crashing into parked cars.

This says it all really. Crossing, school, parking, pedestrian - and still he hit her.


Quote:
on Saturday night.


What time I wonder?

_________________
"The road to a police state is paved with public safety legislation"


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Sat May 30, 2009 09:32 
Offline
Life Member
Life Member
User avatar

Joined: Sat Apr 30, 2005 22:02
Posts: 3266
http://www.middletonguardian.co.uk/news ... er_tragedy

"just before 7pm"

_________________
Speed limit sign radio interview. TV Snap Unhappy
“It has never been the rule in this country – I hope it never will be - that suspected criminal offences must automatically be the subject of prosecution” He added that there should be a prosecution: “wherever it appears that the offence or the circumstances of its commission is or are of such a character that a prosecution in respect thereof is required in the public interest”
This approach has been endorsed by Attorney General ever since 1951. CPS Code


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Sat May 30, 2009 10:53 
Offline
Life Member
Life Member
User avatar

Joined: Sun Sep 25, 2005 15:00
Posts: 1109
Location: Can't see.
1,000cc- I'm presuming some sort of sports bike?

To me, that suggests utter contempt for the law and the ban. Obviously if you're banned, you're banned and it's irrelevant exactly what you want to ride/drive, but I feel it's a lot more symbolically middle finger to choose an exotic ride over a humble commuting machine.

_________________
Fear is a weapon of mass distraction


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Sat May 30, 2009 12:09 
Offline
User

Joined: Sat Oct 04, 2008 13:03
Posts: 685
Oh here we go with the hypocritical commentary.

It was 7pm on a Saturday night outside of a school.

There are hundreds of comments on here justifying the variation of speed limits, examples would be:
    At road works when the workers are not working
    On all roads when the weather is good/bad
    (Dare I say it) Outside of schools when the schools are not working


Now there are comments about this chap being a law breaker as he was a disqualified driver.

Perhaps he could even be described as an "otherwise law abiding motorist!"

The rider shouldn't have been riding, correct; this is no different from someone who was driving quite legally except for say, no seat belt, on a mobile telephone, exceeding the speed limit. Did his disqualification contribute to the collision? No it did not. Of course he wouldn't have been there if he observed his disqualification but contribute to the collision, ,I think not.

Do I have sympathy with he chaps family? Well yes I do, they have lost a family member to an early death. Do I have sympathy with him? Not really but I would prefer he didn't die even if he was unlawful. Do I agree with the plaudits he is receiving? No.

Where are you headed with this? You must surely see the hypocrisy and absurdity of your usual arguments. You can't pick and choose the laws you observe and when you want to ignore them; it doesn't work for anyone.

Even more importantly you can't lambaste this chap because he broke one law with tragic circumstances and then advocate the manipulation of the laws you see as OK to be ignored.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat May 30, 2009 13:48 
Offline
Friend of Safe Speed
Friend of Safe Speed
User avatar

Joined: Sun Sep 25, 2005 10:16
Posts: 7986
Location: Moved to London
GreenShed wrote:
Even more importantly you can't lambaste this chap because he broke one law with tragic circumstances and then advocate the manipulation of the laws you see as OK to be ignored.

He was already arrested twice for driving whilst banned, so it doesn't bode well, but we should also try to determine why he was banned before passing comment; it could simply be bad luck arising from totting up and he was merely trying to retain his income to help his family. Or he could have been a nutcase out for a blast.

We don't yet know the reason for the incident, for example the brakes could have failed.
I certainly don't have enough information to pass judgement on the character or the collision.

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


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Sat May 30, 2009 15:22 
Offline
User

Joined: Sat Oct 04, 2008 13:03
Posts: 685
Steve wrote:
GreenShed wrote:
Even more importantly you can't lambaste this chap because he broke one law with tragic circumstances and then advocate the manipulation of the laws you see as OK to be ignored.

He was already arrested twice for driving whilst banned, so it doesn't bode well, but we should also try to determine why he was banned before passing comment; it could simply be bad luck arising from totting up and he was merely trying to retain his income to help his family. Or he could have been a nutcase out for a blast.

We don't yet know the reason for the incident, for example the brakes could have failed.
I certainly don't have enough information to pass judgement on the character or the collision.

I agree, I don't think it would be fair to pass judgement on him


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat May 30, 2009 16:20 
Offline
User
User avatar

Joined: Sat Aug 13, 2005 23:28
Posts: 1940
GreenShed wrote:
Oh here we go with the hypocritical commentary.

It was 7pm on a Saturday night outside of a school.

There are hundreds of comments on here justifying the variation of speed limits, examples would be:
    At road works when the workers are not working
    On all roads when the weather is good/bad
    (Dare I say it) Outside of schools when the schools are not working



It depend. I usually slow for any roadworks anyway, choosing a safe - usually compliant speed at all time. We not know what speed he actually do - only that he was illegal und uninsured at time of this crash .. That he also have the history of previous conviction. All this give impression of the affable wide boy whom we all like by instinct - but all keep wary of all the same. :?



Quote:
Now there are comments about this chap being a law breaker as he was a disqualified driver.

Perhaps he could even be described as an "otherwise law abiding motorist!"

The rider shouldn't have been riding, correct; this is no different from someone who was driving quite legally except for say, no seat belt, on a mobile telephone, exceeding the speed limit.


I think a lot different as this a very deliberate act. I seat belt/speed infringe may be a careless second. (By seat belt infringe - I mean that second in which he set off but forget to belt up ..It can happen - I have hooted und gestured as folk leave car parks in past... ) Held handy use? That would be relatively deliberate decision to make a call or answer a call.
:roll:

But his choice was deliberate. You know if you are banned or not. You do not "forget" for a second :roll: At this moment in time - I have still not been cleared by medics to ride bike or drive car. So I happen to know or at least have some understanding of how they can yield to temptations.. but all the same - one ist a grown up (or tries to be. I know I play "pretend drive in driver's seat" with childish "eererrrrmmmm VARRROOOOMMMMM!" :hehe:)



Quote:

Did his disqualification contribute to the collision? No it did not. Of course he wouldn't have been there if he observed his disqualification but contribute to the collision, ,I think not.


I do not think we say it did - but he was disqualified three times in a short life time - which mean that perhaps we fail to educate him properly??? :? :? Both in morals/self-discpline- COAST or motivating to safety-led riding

Quote:
Do I have sympathy with he chaps family? Well yes I do, they have lost a family member to an early death. Do I have sympathy with him? Not really but I would prefer he didn't die even if he was unlawful. Do I agree with the plaudits he is receiving? No.


I think we have to bear in mind that he was loved by his family.. but that that family should still have been more draconian or disciplinarian in instilling sense of right und wrong und driving without licence has to be a :nono: Statistics across Europe show that the unlcenced have highest stat rating for carnage to selves und others because they are perhaps more inclined to run the stupidest of risks to avoid capture or perhaps for the thrill of being "naughty""


I think I would be happier if his plaudits reflected his "cheerful personality" but remarked that he was a fool in his actions that day und that he die for senseless reason - by his own decision und possible rider errors made from red mist.


Quote:
Where are you headed with this? You must surely see the hypocrisy and absurdity of your usual arguments. You can't pick and choose the laws you observe and when you want to ignore them; it doesn't work for anyone.


I think we try to warn that illegal unlicenced will die no matter how many speed cams we put on the roads.. that we have to have the penalty to match the first offence to deter further offence - but that with that first offence penalty - there has to be a very comprehensive correcting course leading to pride in the sheer sklll of safe driving/riding. I note that two police forces - Surrey und Durham both are extending free rider courses to help .. along with the already known about DIS. The SAC cget offered under different criteria - as in cam op/NIP

I think perhaps we need more such workshops aimed at the young kids :?


Quote:
Even more importantly you can't lambaste this chap because he broke one law with tragic circumstances and then advocate the manipulation of the laws you see as OK to be ignored.



I think it more than likely that he was biking inconsiderately und incompetently all the same. If his brake fail - his the responsibility to check. Likewise - if diesel slick or water after the rain .. making "greasy surface" - then competent rider would be aware of such :roll: I have to say he probably too fast for the conditions of the road at the time of this crash.

But in all this thread to so far? Has anyone considered his victim whom Mad Doc say will only be able to claim minimum from MIB - und whose compo und treatment land on our collective shoulders und not the deceased's insurers? She the one who really suffer the most? Mad Doc commented that he injured an innocent in the opener and made no comment other than he has little sympathy for the guy but appreciates those who knew him will want to remember him as a nice guy - which they usually are - but this does not mean "exonerate from culpability" all the same.

I note that the "SCP" person I am quoting has not considered her nor even made any comment in this quoted post - such ist his desire to label all here as hypocrites. Und I am not baiting - as I am referring to his own words within the first sentence of his post. If he had any real regard - he would also consider the woman with the SI.

_________________
Nicht ganz im Lot!
Ich setze mich immer wieder in die Nesseln! Der Mad Doc ist mein Mann! Und ich benutzte seinen PC!

UND OUR SMILEYS? Smile ... und the the world smiles with you.
Smiley guy seen when you read
Fine me for Safe Speed
(& other good causes..)

Greatest love & Greatest Achievements Require Greatest Risk
But if you lose the driving plan - don't lose the COAST lesson.
Me?
Je ne regrette rien
!


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Sat May 30, 2009 23:09 
Offline
User

Joined: Sat Oct 04, 2008 13:03
Posts: 685
I have every sympathy for the ladies predicament, discomfort and inconvenience however he thread is about the "Nice guy..."

My point was that we see a hateful first post about this chap; I understand why; the problem is and I hope I explained it; there appears to be a double-standard applied to the observance or otherwise of road traffic law. The hateful commentary at the start is a sign of duplicity and I believe I was justified in pointing that out; I don' need to express sympathy about the seriously injured lady in order to do that.

Observing and enforcing laws requires some discretion and I think that is essential; this means that a line has to be drawn somewhere regarding what is and is not acceptable; I happen to think that discretionary demarcation should not be implemented by choosing which laws are or are not observed but demarcation should be done by degree; i.e. a speed enforcement threshold etc. An opt in/opt out system has a name and I think that name may be anarchy.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun May 31, 2009 00:44 
Offline
User
User avatar

Joined: Mon Mar 08, 2004 21:41
Posts: 3608
Location: North West
GreenShed wrote:
I have every sympathy for the ladies predicament, discomfort and inconvenience however he thread is about the "Nice guy..."


I mentioned in the first instance that htis character injured an innocent person who will have all the trauma of recovery followed by fighting for her insurance rights.


Quote:
My point was that we see a hateful first post about this chap; I understand why; the problem is and I hope I explained it; there appears to be a double-standard applied to the observance or otherwise of road traffic law.


I have zero sympathy for the guy. Why should I? By the way - I have not campaigned for abolition of speed limits - but have asked for more and BETTER TRAINED police I do not want police to let folk off for twice any speed limit - but to use common sense intelligence.

[quote
The hateful commentary at the start is a sign of duplicity and I believe I was justified in pointing that out; I don' need to express sympathy about the seriously injured lady in order to do that.
[/quote]


You are baiting and accusing me of hating the person. I have not one shred of sympathy for the person. He was illegal when he set off and knew he was. Statistics show that this type are more prone to take risks and SPEED excessively .. knowing that they are on/in unregistered vehicles and unlikely to be caughtby any camera and if spotted by police - more than likely to incite to pursuit. Such bring it upon themselves and I have no compassion for these types whatsoever. I may feel for their families - but not really for the person who caused the trauma by his or her own actions. He was illegal and if you are illegal - you just don't do it.





Greenshed wrote:

Observing and enforcing laws requires some discretion and I think that is essential; this means that a line has to be drawn somewhere regarding what is and is not acceptable; I happen to think that discretionary demarcation should not be implemented by choosing which laws are or are not observed but demarcation should be done by degree; i.e. a speed enforcement threshold etc. An opt in/opt out system has a name and I think that name may be anarchy.



I am not talking of 60 in a 30 here nor 120 in 1 70. When we say "discretion" - we are saying within fair reason - allowing for the odd slip - but not the deliberate :censored: take. I think you have been on these boards long enough - Steve - (and I will call you by the first name of the person I suspect you to be :wink:) to know that me, Vrenchen and Charles are basically decent, generally law-abiding and decent types who discuss safe driving but whilst the Geared Up one is a bit of a robot :lol: - me and Vrenchen know that we can bubble a fraction over at times = but are compliant on average per the car computers.

_________________
If you want to get to heaven - you have to raise a little hell!

Smilies are contagious
They are just like the flu
We use our smilies on YOU today
Now Good Causes are smiling too!

KEEP SMILING
It makes folk wonder just what you REALLY got up to last night!

Smily to penny.. penny to pound
safespeed prospers-smiles all round! !

But the real message? SMILE.. GO ON ! DO IT! and the world will smile with you!
Enjoy life! You only have the one bite at it.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Sun May 31, 2009 09:00 
Offline
User

Joined: Sat Oct 04, 2008 13:03
Posts: 685
Mad Moggie wrote:
......I have not campaigned for abolition of speed limits - but have asked for more and BETTER TRAINED police I do not want police to let folk off for twice any speed limit - but to use common sense intelligence.

Who said you did? Your reply doesn't have anything to do with what I have said, you keep replying with irrelevant commentary that is in effect debating with yourself.
OK let's have police at the frequency of cameras...now suggest how it is to be paid for and more importantly explain why you would drive more carefully under a campaign of a perceived higher tolerance and lower level of penalty.

Mad Moggie wrote:
I am not talking of 60 in a 30 here nor 120 in 1 70. When we say "discretion" - we are saying within fair reason - allowing for the odd slip - but not the deliberate :censored: take. ...but whilst the Geared Up one is a bit of a robot :lol: - me and Vrenchen know that we can bubble a fraction over at times = but are compliant on average per the car computers.

The level of discretionary tolerance is available to the public and there is a discretion built into the majority of vehicles in that the speedometer reads high; if drivers are willing to drive like a "robot" or are willing to "bubble a fraction over" and rely on uncalibrated average speedmeters (commercial GPS) then it is no surprise that their luck runs out from time-to-time.
Your comments show that you are willing to take a risk with the speed enforcement as it stands; replace that with what you believe to be a more sympathetic regime and it is hardly likely to encourage you or anyone else to be more compliant and lawful. The suggestion doesn't make any sort of sense whatsoever and for the reasons I have given among others I think it isn't going to happen.
Having said that it is clear you agree with me that there is a degree with which discretion should be operated and I would say that degree is already been applied; your objection is that it is not being applied by the expensive assets you perceive as giving a more sporting and perhaps sympathetic touch. If you can come up with a way that does this at no cost to the lawful then please suggest it; so far in years of campaigning the quality usable road safety output from here is.................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... ................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... ................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... ................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... ................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... ................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... ................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... ................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... ................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... ................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... ................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... ................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... ................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... ................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... ................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... ................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... ................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... ................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... ................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... ................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... ................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... ................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... ................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... ................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... ................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... ................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... ................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... ................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... ................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... ................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... ................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... ................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... ................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... ................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... ................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... ................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... ................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... ................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... ................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... ................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... ................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... ................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... ................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... ................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... ................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... ................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... ................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... ................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... ................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... ................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... ................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... ................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... ................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... ................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... ................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... ................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... ................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... ................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... ................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... ................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... ................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... ................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... ................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... ................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... ................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... ................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... ................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... ................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... ................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... ................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... ................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... ................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... ................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... ...................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun May 31, 2009 10:35 
Offline
User

Joined: Wed Nov 09, 2005 21:10
Posts: 1693
I would like to know whether or not the crossing was a pelican one and, if it was, in whose favour the lights were in at the time?

_________________
"The road to a police state is paved with public safety legislation"


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Sun May 31, 2009 10:38 
Offline
Member
Member

Joined: Wed Feb 16, 2005 18:54
Posts: 4036
Location: Cumbria
GreenShed wrote:
Oh here we go with the hypocritical commentary.

It was 7pm on a Saturday night outside of a school.

There are hundreds of comments on here justifying the variation of speed limits, examples would be:
    At road works when the workers are not working
    On all roads when the weather is good/bad
    (Dare I say it) Outside of schools when the schools are not working


Now there are comments about this chap being a law breaker as he was a disqualified driver.

Perhaps he could even be described as an "otherwise law abiding motorist!"

The rider shouldn't have been riding, correct; this is no different from someone who was driving quite legally except for say, no seat belt, on a mobile telephone, exceeding the speed limit. Did his disqualification contribute to the collision? No it did not. Of course he wouldn't have been there if he observed his disqualification but contribute to the collision, ,I think not.

Do I have sympathy with he chaps family? Well yes I do, they have lost a family member to an early death. Do I have sympathy with him? Not really but I would prefer he didn't die even if he was unlawful. Do I agree with the plaudits he is receiving? No.

Where are you headed with this? You must surely see the hypocrisy and absurdity of your usual arguments. You can't pick and choose the laws you observe and when you want to ignore them; it doesn't work for anyone.

Even more importantly you can't lambaste this chap because he broke one law with tragic circumstances and then advocate the manipulation of the laws you see as OK to be ignored.


Fair points! BUT, I think there are two separate arguments getting confused here.

One is about danger, the other is the old "the law is the law" argument (which was something an old SCP member I used to see on another forum used to get quite hung-up about)!

As has been said, we can't really comment on the "danger" side of things because we don't know the circumstances. As for the "law-is-the-law" argument, well, history is littered with good examples of the breaking of bad laws in order to get them changed or the breaking of other minor laws to draw attention to a cause. The people who did this (suffragettes, civil rights campaigners, faith groups etc) were often labelled "anarchists" (and worse!) but thanks to them y laws got changed.

For what it's worth though, I (and I expect many Safespeeders) don't actually want to see speed limits scrapped altogether, We just want to see policies that recognise that exceeding a speed limit is not, in itself, dangerous! Automated enforcement of an arbitrary limit (with our without a tolerance!) will never achieve that.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Sun May 31, 2009 11:24 
Offline
User
User avatar

Joined: Fri Apr 02, 2004 23:42
Posts: 3820
Does not say if pelican or zebra crossing. Sad case. I agree with GMP's comments.

_________________
Take with a chuckle or a grain of salt
Drive without COAST and it's all your own fault!

A SMILE is a curve that sets everything straight (P Diller).

A Smiley Per post
FINES USfor our COAST!


Approach love and cooking with reckless abandon - but driving with a smile and a COAST calm mind.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Sun May 31, 2009 11:24 
Offline
User
User avatar

Joined: Mon Mar 08, 2004 21:41
Posts: 3608
Location: North West
GreenShed wrote:
Mad Moggie wrote:
......I have not campaigned for abolition of speed limits - but have asked for more and BETTER TRAINED police I do not want police to let folk off for twice any speed limit - but to use common sense intelligence.

Who said you did? Your reply doesn't have anything to do with what I have said, you keep replying with irrelevant commentary that is in effect debating with yourself.


You claimed my first post was a "hateful one" against the biker and then launched off on one about

your post of 11.09 am on Sat 30th wrote:

there are hundreds of comments on here justifying the the variation of speed limits etc
and then claimed his illegal act was no different to speeding.

Well - actually it is - because he made a knowingly deliberate decision and it is highly likely that he would have been speeding at a high margin above lolly and certainly should have seen a woman on a pedestrian crossing - which may have been zebra or pelican - it does not say!

But by implication - you are stating that we are campaigning for no speed limits. I am aware some would like this - but neither me nor my wife are of that mindset.


:roll: :roll:





Quote:
OK let's have police at the frequency of cameras...now suggest how it is to be paid for and more importantly explain why you would drive more carefully under a campaign of a perceived higher tolerance and lower level of penalty



Since you already place a van close to a few of your cams - you askin' :shock:?

But in any case - we are told there are umpteen more police officers. So it gets paid for by removing the false targets and the red tape - freeing them to do their job at the same fees we are paying now for these officers to be uniformed "desk jockeys"

We are suggesting police are still able to use professional judgement within a set and fair criteria. I am aware of a police officer on another message board who claimed he let someone off for 60 mph in a 30 mph and another at 120 in a 70. Now you and me both know that this should not happen - even though I dare say those drivers thought birthdays/Xmas rolled together in tinselly ribbons.. So I would be requiring some ceiling of :nono:all the same - but some common sense used all the same - based 100% on the condition and behaviour at that time .. but certainly no "get out clause for crass stupidity" Also - the tolerance would be "perceived" - you could still not guarantee outcome - nor where they are at any one time - so thus it would improve carefulness as it did before the cams appeared :wink:

Quote:
Mad Moggie wrote:
I am not talking of 60 in a 30 here nor 120 in 1 70. When we say "discretion" - we are saying within fair reason - allowing for the odd slip - but not the deliberate :censored: take. ...but whilst the Geared Up one is a bit of a robot :lol: - me and Vrenchen know that we can bubble a fraction over at times = but are compliant on average per the car computers.

The level of discretionary tolerance is available to the public and there is a discretion built into the majority of vehicles in that the speedometer reads high; if drivers are willing to drive like a "robot" or are willing to "bubble a fraction over" and rely on uncalibrated average speedmeters (commercial GPS) then it is no surprise that their luck runs out from time-to-time.



Nope - I can supply you - off line perhaps - with the link to the forum where a police officer whom we have proven to be a police officer made a comment stating he allowed a discretion to a driver at 60 mph in a 30 mph and another boasting 120 mph in a 70 mph. By the way - his actions were certainly not in keeping with the official policy per the police force's website :wink:

As for us? We suggesting a driving system which will help people stick to the limits better :wink: without any luck .. just plain :steering:

Quote:
Quote:
Your comments show that you are willing to take a risk with the speed enforcement as it stands; replace that with what you believe to be a more sympathetic regime and it is hardly likely to encourage you or anyone else to be more compliant and lawful.


If you train the police correctly, have plenty on patrol at any one time - and you know they could be anywhere out there - then you will be more aware and compliant as we were before. These days? Folk manipulate the speed cams and only look for these.

Quote:

The suggestion doesn't make any sort of sense whatsoever and for the reasons I have given among others I think it isn't going to happen.
Having said that it is clear you agree with me that there is a degree with which discretion should be operated and I would say that degree is already been applied; your objection is that it is not being applied by the expensive assets you perceive as giving a more sporting and perhaps sympathetic touch. If you can come up with a way that does this at no cost to the lawful then please suggest it; so far in years of campaigning the quality usable road safety output from here is


Did not understand the last bit... Already suggested that paperwork gets removed and the officers we pay for start patrolling. Many police forces who claim they have placed officers out there on routines again are finding all levels of crime including traffic "offences" begin to decrease.

The degree of tolerance is not being applied based on what a police officer posted to another board in any case.

_________________
If you want to get to heaven - you have to raise a little hell!

Smilies are contagious
They are just like the flu
We use our smilies on YOU today
Now Good Causes are smiling too!

KEEP SMILING
It makes folk wonder just what you REALLY got up to last night!

Smily to penny.. penny to pound
safespeed prospers-smiles all round! !

But the real message? SMILE.. GO ON ! DO IT! and the world will smile with you!
Enjoy life! You only have the one bite at it.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Sun May 31, 2009 13:10 
Offline
User

Joined: Sat Oct 04, 2008 13:03
Posts: 685
Mad Moggie wrote:
We are suggesting police are still able to use professional judgement within a set and fair criteria. I am aware of a police officer on another message board who claimed he let someone off for 60 mph in a 30 mph and another at 120 in a 70. Now you and me both know that this should not happen - even though I dare say those drivers thought birthdays/Xmas rolled together in tinselly ribbons.. So I would be requiring some ceiling of :nono:all the same - but some common sense used all the same - based 100% on the condition and behaviour at that time .. but certainly no "get out clause for crass stupidity" Also - the tolerance would be "perceived" - you could still not guarantee outcome - nor where they are at any one time - so thus it would improve carefulness as it did before the cams appeared :wink:


We already have a system where the levels are set and professional judgement is used. There will always be variation of this because, stragely enough the officers are people, same goes for safety camera operators. Mechanical unattended devices always work to a fixed criteria once set by...the person... who sets them; in essence the same criteria and judgement is used because the camera is set by a person. Why is this significantly different from road traffic patrols? The only reason they can be preferred is the perceived fighting chance of a let off, as is illustrated by your examples. While the level is high it is up to the individual officer at the time to make the decision and that is obviously what they did; I don't think they would be justified in setting that sort of level permanently or as a blanket rule-of-thumb.

At no time have I said or do I believe that Safespeed want to get rid of speed limits; what I have said is that they should certainly not be optional as I believe is how Safespeed's mission can be summarised. I am in support of variable limits but I can't see why they should be considered if the limits we have now are not respected.

The problem you have is that the discretionary limits operated do not meet with the idea of discretion you have; if you want that changed have a try at being a roads minister where you will have a chance of influence. The problem with that is you would be getting better advice and the policy would most likely stay as is.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun May 31, 2009 13:18 
Offline
Supporter
Supporter
User avatar

Joined: Thu Oct 16, 2008 13:45
Posts: 4042
Location: Near Buxton, Derbyshire
Quote:
Mechanical unattended devices always work to a fixed criteria once set by...the person... who sets them; in essence the same criteria and judgement is used because the camera is set by a person.


With respect, that is nonsense. For a start the cameras are set to follow "guidelines" - in effect they are set by a committee which pays scant attention to the circumstances of the camera sit. Secondly they are set to fixed limit, irrespective of time of day, volume of traffic, presence of pedestrians. As if a traffic policeman decided his criteria for nipping people whilst he was still in bed. In principle the court should be able exercise discretion but, in practice, there are massive discouragements to taking a case to court.

_________________
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


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Sun May 31, 2009 14:00 
Offline
User
User avatar

Joined: Mon Mar 08, 2004 21:41
Posts: 3608
Location: North West
GreenShed wrote:
Mad Moggie wrote:
We are suggesting police are still able to use professional judgement within a set and fair criteria. I am aware of a police officer on another message board who claimed he let someone off for 60 mph in a 30 mph and another at 120 in a 70. Now you and me both know that this should not happen - even though I dare say those drivers thought birthdays/Xmas rolled together in tinselly ribbons.. So I would be requiring some ceiling of :nono:all the same - but some common sense used all the same - based 100% on the condition and behaviour at that time .. but certainly no "get out clause for crass stupidity" Also - the tolerance would be "perceived" - you could still not guarantee outcome - nor where they are at any one time - so thus it would improve carefulness as it did before the cams appeared :wink:


We already have a system where the levels are set and professional judgement is used. There will always be variation of this because, stragely enough the officers are people, same goes for safety camera operators.



Yes I know this and you probably know the old joke about us medics - you never get two to agree with each other's opinion over treatments ...:wink: Seriously - we will read symptoms differently on occasions.

So I am aware each officer and each man in the van may see things differently. One (A66 site) likes the funny faces our kids pull and another does not :hehe:

Quote:
Mechanical unattended devices always work to a fixed criteria once set by...the person... who sets them; in essence the same criteria and judgement is used because the camera is set by a person. Why is this significantly different from road traffic patrols?




Because too often they seem to set at zero. We are now finding VAS signs flash up a red 28mph in a 30 mph when this only used to happen at 33 mph on the same sign :roll: We've even had the cams at Ings flashing at 30mph and that's a 40 mph zone. When folk have contacted your office about it .. and I have and I know Ern has
in the past - we've been told that "you are testing it but if "if you were below 40 mph SIR then you have nothing to fear" - but that's not the point. I cannot trust something which I seen not to be working properly.

Also - we all know that the cameras are "manipulated" as drivers slow for the camera and then speed back up to 15 mph above the lolly. :popcorn: Now maybe Pc Average Nice Guy may not take much notice and allow for friendly warning. But I'm still behind the idiot who brakes hard for the camera and who irks me to high heaven by doing so. So you cannot say the camera makes folk more "lawful or compliant" on that basis which was what I think you were trying to point out.



Quote:
The only reason they can be preferred is the perceived fighting chance of a let off, as is illustrated by your examples. While the level is high it is up to the individual officer at the time to make the decision and that is obviously what they did; I don't think they would be justified in setting that sort of level permanently or as a blanket rule-of-thumb.


I do not think they were justified at all in reality - but the manner in which they posted gave a foolish impression which was not in keeping with the official policies as published on the internet by their police forces.

see your own post on another thread

Greenshed wrote:
At no time have I said or do I believe that Safespeed want to get rid of speed limits; what I have said is that they should certainly not be optional as I believe is how Safespeed's mission can be summarised.



I think you may find my first posts were in a thread about this. My view back then has not changed: Much as I know that me and Wildy are fully capable and competent at driving Jag and the rest of our "harem/toy boys" (respectively) at high speeds and have done so abroad - I cannot see how on earth we can police a policy whereby we can drive at Jag's top impressive speed as "proven RoSPA/HPC etc" with a sticker to show eligibility and rest drive at 80mph or lower if a two year probationer. I think we can and should already raise motorway to 80 mph to bring into line with continent .. and steadily improve driver education before we could even think of going down that route.

Quote:
I am in support of variable limits but I can't see why they should be considered if the limits we have now are not respected.

The problem you have is that the discretionary limits operated do not meet with the idea of discretion you have; if you want that changed have a try at being a roads minister where you will have a chance of influence. The problem with that is you would be getting better advice and the policy would most likely stay as is.

[/quote]


I am not sure if you were replying to someone and forgot the quotes?

Munich area has variable limits which work - so we implement similar harmonised training of German standard as we said in March 2004 as the then collective of posters at that time.

We can of course lobby for changes and we do send letters out to local MPs and opposition politicians - but are holding fire for now to see if they stand down and wwe then lobby the "candidate-elect" :wink:

_________________
If you want to get to heaven - you have to raise a little hell!

Smilies are contagious
They are just like the flu
We use our smilies on YOU today
Now Good Causes are smiling too!

KEEP SMILING
It makes folk wonder just what you REALLY got up to last night!

Smily to penny.. penny to pound
safespeed prospers-smiles all round! !

But the real message? SMILE.. GO ON ! DO IT! and the world will smile with you!
Enjoy life! You only have the one bite at it.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 31 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next

All times are UTC [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You can post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
[ Time : 0.045s | 12 Queries | GZIP : Off ]