johnfelstead

after reading the article i would say the guy got such a heavy sentance because he was lying to the court, his evidence and plea was a joke. I bet if he accepted guilt he would have got a much smaller sentance. Two collegues gave evidence, one in the car as passenger and one on duty saying the same story about him rushing to a football game and yet he pleads Inocent, what a stupid man.

Spoon

Dazza01-Stop spouting snót, 100mph doesn't automatically get you a ban!

Jye

scoobynutta555, that wasnt me posting those comments btw, just in case you thought it was. I do talk utter crap mind

brickboy

Reading the article puts the whole thing in perspective -- he seems to have made up a number of excuses before owning up.

Also, he was in a V6 Vectra, so I'd say dangerous driving is a fair cop

Jerome

I found several things about this case disappointing.

Firstly the days of any brother/sisterhood in the Police have gone it would seem. I don't mean that police officers should get away with everything, but in this case I think the policewoman could have used her discretion. Even his (former?) colleague in the car bubbled him. Maybe stabbing each other in the back gets officers brownie points in todays Police force. A sad state of affairs.

He was guilty of a serious error of judgement, in speeding off-duty and apparently trying to lie to get out of it. I also think he should set an example for civilians when he is on and off duty. Having said that, I think his punishment was particularly harsh. He still faces a disciplinary hearing - maybe they'll just twist the knife embedded in his back to really screw him over.

As an aside, many years ago, I was contemplating taking advanced driver training. I mentioned this to a Policeman friend of mine and he said "just make sure you don't end up in court". When I asked why he said "the courts often make the penalty for any motoring offences you're convicted of harsher if you're an advanced driver because you should know better".

Dazza01

Spoon
100mph + gets u a ban there is a plus sign in there,ie 110mph or 121mph..... if u think im wrong try it and see m8


[Edited by Dazza01 - 1/20/2004 3:04:34 PM]

[Edited by Dazza01 - 1/20/2004 3:05:34 PM]

Jerome

Between 100 and 119 (30 to 49 over any limit) it is an automatic ban unless you can prove you will suffer undue hardship by losing your licence. You can only plea this once in a 3 year period.

120 and over (50 over any limit) is an automatic ban.

Spoon

Dazza01- I tried 133mph and didn't get a ban so I speak from experience or do you want the + higher?

Spoon

Another one for the snót forum then.

Tiggs

"120MPH is not that quick for a modern car, 150MPH isnt that quick either."

nonsense.

i have a 540 auto...if anything can go quick while feeling relaxed its that yet if i did a 120 i would know it and cars in the lane next to me doing 70 would be closing at speeds of 50mph plus.

120 is fast...and the cop is an idiot.

T

ps- i've done more trackdays than most on here on a bike that was faster than most on here before anyone dives in with a "ohhhh, 120 is quick to you because you aint used to it"

pps- please read the previous statment twice and look up "most" in a dictonairy before explaing that you may have done more trackdays or had a faster way of getting round them.

Spoon

Tiggs-Blimey, 120mph in a boat is fast.

120mph in a quick car(read quick not fast) is nothing at all.

Jerome

120 is an automatic ban. There may be exceptional circumstances where people get off though. People even get off without a ban for drink driving, it's still normally an automatic ban.

Tiggs

oh dear, oh dear.

my last few vehicles are a 540 BMW, a 4liter TVR and Yamaha R1 (and a scoob but that wasnt fast) in all these 120 felt very fast.

Spoon

The TVR rattles would have been loud at 120mph and the R1 "jacket bulge" would have helped.

Maybe you did find 120mph fast, that's why there are speed limits for the timid.

s6pra

OK get real! I wonder what kind of argument that is! You always have a child or an old lady in your pocket to beam up in fron of a fast moving car!

That's the most ridiculous thing I have heard. He shouldn't be prossecuted at all.

Unless you are saying that me running to the car at about 16mph at the Tesco's car park (10mph speed limit) is "dangerous running" and an ant will come out in front of me from behind a little stone. Next thing you know is you'll want to prossecute!

This country needs to start taking some pills fast!

Peter

cookiemonster

LOL at this. All health and safety based rules are based on some perceived level of risk - there's no other practical way of enforcing laws.

Is everyone "safe" driving after 1.9 pints of beer, but "dangerous" on 2.1?

Is my car "safe" on 1.61mm tread cheng shing tyres in the wet, but "dangerous" 1.59mm teaded F1's in the dry?

Of course not - but its impossible to set 60 million different rules changing every instant in time to account for each persons constantly changing individual circumstances.

Driving at any speed may or may not be dangerous in that specific instant and that specific person, but as we are all **** poor judges of risk - right up to the crash - some baseline is needed. In this case its a very very clear 70mph.

This "speeding isnt dangerous, inappropriate speed is" line is such a moronic, stupid, simplistic arguement I get lost for words.

Tiggs

This "speeding isnt dangerous, inappropriate speed is" line is such a moronic, stupid, simplistic arguement I get lost for words.


common sense at last.

Spoon

Well if we have the likes of you pair in any form of power in the country then there is no helping us.

How can a blanket speed limit be the last word?

So 50mph on a snow filled motorway is ok because the speed limit is 70mph? No, it's innapropriate speed but it's not speeding is it?

Tiggs

spoon,

read this and see if you think it leaves any oppertunity to have a small number of changable limits to allow for the conditions you describe:

"but its impossible to set 60 million different rules changing every instant in time to account for each persons constantly changing individual circumstances."

i think you may find some gap between 1 and 60 million where common sense could exist?

Spoon

Tiggs- I believe you are on the wrong thread. You sure aren't following the script.

Cookiemonster- That's the attitude that puts us all in the twát box.

You admit to being a píss poor judge of risk by all means, I won't because I know I'm not, but with a blanket ruling I am.

cookiemonster

LOL @ spoon

Ok - One rule for you, because you're a wonderful judge of risk. And another for Kevin in his Astra and my mum because they're not.

Now, how do we deal with the other 59 million and something ?

Oh, I know - how about standard speed limits ranging from 20 - 70 mph depending on the road, and a rule that says you can get done for careless or dangerous driving if you're doing something careless or dangerous thats not neccessarily speed dependant?

Dazza01

Spoon, u must have been one lucky mother on that day then how did u get off that ??

Spoon

No Cookiemonster not at all. It points out the situation of no discretion that's all which was my original point.

The laws are the laws for everybody to adhere to but they don't have to be right. They are made by people in my opinion who would bore me rigid if I sat at the same table.

Dazza01- A mixture of an excellent solicitor and my good looks swayed the very attractive lady behind the desk.

Spoon

Cookiemonster-Driving up the motorway on the opposite carraigeway at 40mph isn't speeding but will no doubt gain you a CD or DD charge so it already exists.

I suggest we end here as I'm beginning to imagine you are on the same table as me and the sight of your chunky knit sweater is nauseating.

cookiemonster

Spoon - exactly (I'm sorry i didn't realise that you'd take a while to catch on).

Whatever

When you start on the person insults its game over

Spoon

Okay, your jumper isn't that bad.










The cornish pasty shoes are though.

scunnered

iTrader: (1)

I haven't read all the arguements but here's my opinion.
The only thing the policeman is guilty of is "lack of observation".
He should have been fully aware of all other road users.

A couple of years ago a pair of "off duty" policemen were caught riding their motorcycles at high speed. They said they were not aware of how fast they were going. Their excuse was "driving at a speed appropriate to the conditions and making progress on the road".
Do you have any idea how far you travel when you take your eyes off the road to look at your speedo? During this fairly short space of time you could quite easily have travelled a couple of hundred feet while not looking where you're going.

And don't forget the fact that we all have different levels of ability and competency when driving. Diferent vehicles can travel more safely at higher speeds than others.

johnfelstead

Tiggs, 120MPH or even 150MPH isnt that quick. Where did i mention this in context with other vehicles and closing speeds? I didnt. If this was on a road where the other trafic was doing 60MPH then it would be a dangerous way to drive, but i didnt mention that as the circumstance did i.

I drive quite regularly at 150MPH in Germany, it's not quick at all when everything else is doing the same, in fact its probably safer than most of the roads in the UK because everyone is half asleep at the wheel in the UK.

I have been in a car capable of doing 220MPH, 150MPH is nothing in something like that, you arnt even in top gear.

Speed is all about the context of where and how it is achieved. To argue otherwise is silly. and i did state that last time, but you ignored the caveats. ho hum.

Tiggs

i give up....120 is slow compared to space shuttles so you lot crack on

matty01

edited cOs i IS fIK



CORNER

[Edited by matty01 - 1/21/2004 7:28:44 PM]

[Edited by matty01 - 1/21/2004 7:44:07 PM]