HELP PLEASE - SPEEDING BAN/DEVICE ADVICE
11 July 2004, 08:53 PM
#91
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 369
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by tiggers
Surely though you can see it is just a difference of opinion. You think 100mph is OK whereas Paul obviously on that particular journey thought 128mph was OK.
You say you don't think your opinion is more important than others yet you call him a **** amongst other things becuase he has a different opinion to you.
JSW - sorry, but you are a hypocrite and that is plain for all to see.
You say you don't think your opinion is more important than others yet you call him a **** amongst other things becuase he has a different opinion to you.
JSW - sorry, but you are a hypocrite and that is plain for all to see.
TIGGERS, LET ME SPELL IT OUT
I MAKE NO MENTION OF WHAT MY OPINION IS THROUGHOUT THE WHOLE THREAD AS THAT IS NOT THE POINT.
IF YOU WANT TO MAKE IT THE POINT THEN FINE, WHAT I HAVE BEEN SAYING IS 128MPH IS CRAZY AND HE DESERVS TO BE BANNED, IF YOU WANT TO ARGUE WHAT THE LIMIT SHOULD BE THEN START A THREAD AND I WILL POST MY OPINIONS.
I AINT DOING IT HERE AS IT IS OFF SUBJECT.
11 July 2004, 08:53 PM
#92
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Logged Out
Posts: 10,221
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
JSW- It's fairly plain to see you are way out of your depth with your awful excuses and now your schoolboy insults. I have more intelligence in my bell end than you could muster up in a fit.
You really have got in a fluster looking at your latter posts.
You really have got in a fluster looking at your latter posts.
11 July 2004, 08:57 PM
#94
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 369
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
spoon, why are you not answering my last post to you?
Can you still not see this
---------------
I would still like paul or people who have defended his actions to answer my previous question
--------------
Time to admit you didn't read it properly and you now look like a tit. he he he.
Can you still not see this
---------------
I would still like paul or people who have defended his actions to answer my previous question
--------------
Time to admit you didn't read it properly and you now look like a tit. he he he.
11 July 2004, 09:06 PM
#97
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Cymru
Posts: 1,147
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by J S W
I don't think my opinion is bigger than anybody's, I feel 128 mph on a public road is complete madness, I am astonished that more of you don't agree with me.
You asked my opinion and out of curtesy I gave you an honest answer, it would have been so easy to say 70mph.
the only speed that I have said is safe throughout this whole thread is 70mph as that is the legal limit, I have not mentioned or hinted at all what I think the limit should be (until you asked me).
Don't really understand your point, you are trying to put words in my mouth!!
You asked my opinion and out of curtesy I gave you an honest answer, it would have been so easy to say 70mph.
the only speed that I have said is safe throughout this whole thread is 70mph as that is the legal limit, I have not mentioned or hinted at all what I think the limit should be (until you asked me).
Don't really understand your point, you are trying to put words in my mouth!!
11 July 2004, 09:09 PM
#98
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Logged Out
Posts: 10,221
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by J S W
spoon, why are you not answering my last post to you?
Can you still not see this
---------------
I would still like paul or people who have defended his actions to answer my previous question
--------------
Time to admit you didn't read it properly and you now look like a tit. he he he.
Can you still not see this
---------------
I would still like paul or people who have defended his actions to answer my previous question
--------------
Time to admit you didn't read it properly and you now look like a tit. he he he.
Originally Posted by J S W
P.s Paul why have you not answered my question about your wife?
Hard to answer isn't it?
Hard to answer isn't it?
You'll find my answer to your now very boring repetetive tantrum on posts, 76, 80 and 87.
As for looking a tít I'm pretty sure anybody reading the posts will see you have completely messed up and aborted any sensible, mature reasoning.
11 July 2004, 09:12 PM
#99
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Feb 1999
Location: Lots of different places! (Thank you Mr. Lambert)
Posts: 3,037
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by J S W
I MAKE NO MENTION OF WHAT MY OPINION IS THROUGHOUT THE WHOLE THREAD AS THAT IS NOT THE POINT.
IF YOU WANT TO MAKE IT THE POINT THEN FINE, WHAT I HAVE BEEN SAYING IS 128MPH IS CRAZY AND HE DESERVS TO BE BANNED
IF YOU WANT TO MAKE IT THE POINT THEN FINE, WHAT I HAVE BEEN SAYING IS 128MPH IS CRAZY AND HE DESERVS TO BE BANNED
Both are in breach of the law so why are we supposed to accept your 100mph as OK and Paul's 128mph is acting like a ****?
With respect I can't see how you can defend your position unless of course you just want to yell and call me a **** as well
Anyway I think my work here is done.
Regards,
tiggers.
11 July 2004, 09:12 PM
#100
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Logged Out
Posts: 10,221
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Private Message: spoon
Today, 21:02
J S W
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jan 1970
Posts: 356 spoon
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
come on spoon answer the question from page 3 not page 2.
stop hiding and come out fighting like a real man.
you thick ****
Today, 21:02
J S W
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jan 1970
Posts: 356 spoon
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
come on spoon answer the question from page 3 not page 2.
stop hiding and come out fighting like a real man.
you thick ****
That's going to make me isn't it. 
11 July 2004, 09:20 PM
#101
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 369
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Spoon, I will summerise for you.
On page 2 I asked paul my now infamous question
On page 3 I repeated my question BUT just above I asked either paul or the "people who have been defending him" to reply (the full post is shown on reply 88).
IMO you have been defending his actions so this includes you.
The only reason why I am still bothering to post on this thread is I believe the question holds a very simple answer and this answer sums up Paul.
On page 2 I asked paul my now infamous question
On page 3 I repeated my question BUT just above I asked either paul or the "people who have been defending him" to reply (the full post is shown on reply 88).
IMO you have been defending his actions so this includes you.
The only reason why I am still bothering to post on this thread is I believe the question holds a very simple answer and this answer sums up Paul.
11 July 2004, 09:27 PM
#102
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 369
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by tiggers
Yes you do at least by implication. You called him a **** for doing 128mph, but then say you think 100mph is OK.
Both are in breach of the law so why are we supposed to accept your 100mph as OK and Paul's 128mph is acting like a ****?
With respect I can't see how you can defend your position unless of course you just want to yell and call me a **** as well
Anyway I think my work here is done.
Regards,
tiggers.
Both are in breach of the law so why are we supposed to accept your 100mph as OK and Paul's 128mph is acting like a ****?
With respect I can't see how you can defend your position unless of course you just want to yell and call me a **** as well
Anyway I think my work here is done.
Regards,
tiggers.
You asked my opinion then brought it into the debate,
before you asked the question my opinion on what speed is exceptable formed no part of this thread or the posts I had made.
If you disagree with above statement please post examples to prove me wrong.
I still ain't saying that 100mph is acceptable in the eyes of the law.
what i am saying is 128mph is not acceptable in the eyes of the law.
these are two very different things.
11 July 2004, 09:43 PM
#103
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Feb 1999
Location: Lots of different places! (Thank you Mr. Lambert)
Posts: 3,037
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by J S W
before you asked the question my opinion on what speed is exceptable formed no part of this thread or the posts I had made.
If you disagree with above statement please post examples to prove me wrong.
If you disagree with above statement please post examples to prove me wrong.
Originally Posted by J S W
I can understand speeds of 90 - 95 in good weather conditions on quiet roads, if you speak to many police officers they will not stop you for doing this speed, 128 is plain stupid and I am quite happy to stand up and point that out.
If people don't like it then fine but I shall enjoy driving well people like paul get on the bus
If people don't like it then fine but I shall enjoy driving well people like paul get on the bus
Regards,
tiggers.
11 July 2004, 09:58 PM
#104
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 369
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Read my last post to you and I say and I quote "before you asked the question my opinion on what speed is exceptable formed no part of this thread or the posts I had made"
Not great english I except,
what I am saying in that statement is in this whole thread the opinions I make (before your question) on Paul's speeding offence make no mention of what speeds I feel are acceptable on the motorway, that is seperate arugument.
Once you asked that question it changes this argument from "128mph is not accpetable" to "128mph is not acceptable but 100mph is" I would never have that argument as both speeds are illegal, IMO one is far more serious than the other.
My main point has been he should not be on the road if he feel's 128MPH is accpetable on a pubilc road where other road users could be harmed as a direct result of his actions.
I didn't say 128mph is not acceptable but 100mph is.
Not great english I except,
what I am saying in that statement is in this whole thread the opinions I make (before your question) on Paul's speeding offence make no mention of what speeds I feel are acceptable on the motorway, that is seperate arugument.
Once you asked that question it changes this argument from "128mph is not accpetable" to "128mph is not acceptable but 100mph is" I would never have that argument as both speeds are illegal, IMO one is far more serious than the other.
My main point has been he should not be on the road if he feel's 128MPH is accpetable on a pubilc road where other road users could be harmed as a direct result of his actions.
I didn't say 128mph is not acceptable but 100mph is.
Last edited by J S W; 11 July 2004 at 10:02 PM.
11 July 2004, 10:04 PM
#105
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Feb 1999
Location: Lots of different places! (Thank you Mr. Lambert)
Posts: 3,037
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by J S W
Read my last post to you and I say and I quote "before you asked the question my opinion on what speed is exceptable formed no part of this thread or the posts I had made"
Not great english I except,
what I am saying in that statement is in this whole thread the opinions I make (before your question) on Paul's speeding offence make no mention of what speeds I feel are acceptable on the motorway, that is seperate arugument.
Not great english I except,
what I am saying in that statement is in this whole thread the opinions I make (before your question) on Paul's speeding offence make no mention of what speeds I feel are acceptable on the motorway, that is seperate arugument.
tiggers.
11 July 2004, 10:13 PM
#108
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Texas - It's BIG!
Posts: 2,105
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I haven't managed to read all the posts here, but am eager to get my two pence worth!
As far as what is acceptable on the road, nothing over 70mph is acceptable on the motorway, as that is the law (sorry if I am repeating anyone) but hardly anyone drives at 70 on a motorway, to be honest it feels very slow to me. Yesterday I was sitting at a speed around the 100 mark (this may be kmh for legal reasons...) and I had a Ford KA up my backside and a Nissan van in front of me.... anyway, my point is that over 70mph you've no excuse, obviously the police have discretion to certain speed, but to an old dear in her Fiesta, 100mph is unacceptable, to some people on here 140mph is unacceptable etc etc, you get caught over the limit then I say you put your hands up, we all know the law. I by no means agree with a 70 limit and I think people sitting blindly in the fast lane at 72mph without ever looking in their mirrors should be punished more than a speeder, but thats my view and opinion.
I have clocked some speeds that when I look back I think were stupid, know were stupid, but I'll do them again but I won't do them in the rain on a busy motorway. I never get close to other cars when travelling at speed and I feel I am very aware and I hope my tyres won't suddenly shred or my brakes go. But if I got caught, then I knew what would happen and I knew ultimately I was being stupid, but most things that are enjoyable in life involve a little risk and an element of disregard.
I think you should respect other road users and never intentionally endanger others, but as to what is an acceptable way to break the law, there isn't one.
As far as what is acceptable on the road, nothing over 70mph is acceptable on the motorway, as that is the law (sorry if I am repeating anyone) but hardly anyone drives at 70 on a motorway, to be honest it feels very slow to me. Yesterday I was sitting at a speed around the 100 mark (this may be kmh for legal reasons...) and I had a Ford KA up my backside and a Nissan van in front of me.... anyway, my point is that over 70mph you've no excuse, obviously the police have discretion to certain speed, but to an old dear in her Fiesta, 100mph is unacceptable, to some people on here 140mph is unacceptable etc etc, you get caught over the limit then I say you put your hands up, we all know the law. I by no means agree with a 70 limit and I think people sitting blindly in the fast lane at 72mph without ever looking in their mirrors should be punished more than a speeder, but thats my view and opinion.
I have clocked some speeds that when I look back I think were stupid, know were stupid, but I'll do them again but I won't do them in the rain on a busy motorway. I never get close to other cars when travelling at speed and I feel I am very aware and I hope my tyres won't suddenly shred or my brakes go. But if I got caught, then I knew what would happen and I knew ultimately I was being stupid, but most things that are enjoyable in life involve a little risk and an element of disregard.
I think you should respect other road users and never intentionally endanger others, but as to what is an acceptable way to break the law, there isn't one.
11 July 2004, 10:18 PM
#109
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 369
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I have said enough on this subject and haven't got any more time to keep arguing. I hope that I made my point and that was:
"I have no sympathy at all for Paul and I hope he gets a fair ban to reflect the speed he was travelling at, I will feel more comfortable knowing one less dangerous driver is on the road.
However once he has done the time I hope he would not be stupid enough to do that sort of speed again and enjoys safe motoring in the future"
All the best.
James
P.s. I am a ******
"I have no sympathy at all for Paul and I hope he gets a fair ban to reflect the speed he was travelling at, I will feel more comfortable knowing one less dangerous driver is on the road.
However once he has done the time I hope he would not be stupid enough to do that sort of speed again and enjoys safe motoring in the future"
All the best.
James
P.s. I am a ******
11 July 2004, 10:34 PM
#110
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Apr 2003
Posts: 1,985
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
James, before you go: you haven't answered my question. Do you supervise your wife, mother, mates, or children (delete as applicable/available) when they are putting on their trousers?
If not then you are exposing them to about the same risk as Paul exposed his wife to, assuming she was in the car with him.
Remember, road safety isn't an accident and it isn't about emotional reactions to individual events but about a logical analysis of the risk factors involved. Much as the government would like you to get emotional about it if you are going to do your bit to save lives on the roads, which you seem keen to do, you need to put emotion back in it's box and let science and fact take the lead.
If not then you are exposing them to about the same risk as Paul exposed his wife to, assuming she was in the car with him.
Remember, road safety isn't an accident and it isn't about emotional reactions to individual events but about a logical analysis of the risk factors involved. Much as the government would like you to get emotional about it if you are going to do your bit to save lives on the roads, which you seem keen to do, you need to put emotion back in it's box and let science and fact take the lead.
11 July 2004, 10:51 PM
#111
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 185
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think it's quite comforting that we have JSW as the spokesman for the anti-speeding brigade - that kind of intellectual firepower is just awesome. I can only assume he's representative of the whole bunch.
Tell me, James, do all your friends love the **** as well?
Tell me, James, do all your friends love the **** as well?
12 July 2004, 09:59 AM
#113
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Derbyshire
Posts: 12,304
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Senior_AP
Got to admit. You're only about 15mph off of the record top speed caught in the UK.
, caught on the A1 M. Japanese guy in a Ferrari (same one that did the F40 video through Tokyo). He got jailed.
12 July 2004, 10:38 AM
#114
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 39,877
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Paul
I think you should look very carefully at the advice that Hedgehog has given you, must be something helpful to your case in all that.
I think personally that you have to really push deeply into the matter of the equipment used and its calibration etc. as well as its acceptability for use as a speed measuring device anyway. Sounds like they are a bit worried on that score. I would think that all speed measuring devices need calibration, can,t think that a self calibrating abilitity can be legally acceptable. Any other evidence such as photos etc should be provided as well of course. By your description of their attitude there seemed to be some bias towards you personally too.
Passengers evidence is not acceptable in court as being independent.
Sounds like you did reach that speed without really intending to, its not difficult in a car like that, but I don't think that "momentary lapse of attention" will cut any ice with the court. 58 MPH over the limit is too much for them to accept. Best to concentrate on the measuring device I'd think and the fact that you don't believe you were guilty of reaching that speed.
I don't think that all the insult throwing is going to do any good on this thread. Just a bit of "macho" posturing I reckon. I don't personally agree with deliberate driving at 3 figure speeds on the public road but I think that it is high time that the motorway speed limit was raised to somewhere near what most people drive at these days which is 85 MPH. The penalties for exceeding that should be severe enough to discourage excessive cheating on that limit.
I do notice that as you get nearer to London however that drivers do drive a lot faster than that. Must be all those "yuppies" living in the fast lane. Literally most of the time too!
Les
I think you should look very carefully at the advice that Hedgehog has given you, must be something helpful to your case in all that.
I think personally that you have to really push deeply into the matter of the equipment used and its calibration etc. as well as its acceptability for use as a speed measuring device anyway. Sounds like they are a bit worried on that score. I would think that all speed measuring devices need calibration, can,t think that a self calibrating abilitity can be legally acceptable. Any other evidence such as photos etc should be provided as well of course. By your description of their attitude there seemed to be some bias towards you personally too.
Passengers evidence is not acceptable in court as being independent.
Sounds like you did reach that speed without really intending to, its not difficult in a car like that, but I don't think that "momentary lapse of attention" will cut any ice with the court. 58 MPH over the limit is too much for them to accept. Best to concentrate on the measuring device I'd think and the fact that you don't believe you were guilty of reaching that speed.
I don't think that all the insult throwing is going to do any good on this thread. Just a bit of "macho" posturing I reckon. I don't personally agree with deliberate driving at 3 figure speeds on the public road but I think that it is high time that the motorway speed limit was raised to somewhere near what most people drive at these days which is 85 MPH. The penalties for exceeding that should be severe enough to discourage excessive cheating on that limit.
I do notice that as you get nearer to London however that drivers do drive a lot faster than that. Must be all those "yuppies" living in the fast lane. Literally most of the time too!
Les
12 July 2004, 10:50 AM
#115
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Essexville
Posts: 4,391
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
have said enough on this subject and haven't got any more time to keep arguing
128 hmmmmm. well, we'll all be liars if we say we haven't, to use another quote"stretched our car's legs..." the unfortunate thing is getting caught.
The battle between plod and the speeding is fast tipping towards the boys in blue with the latest gadgety, and the chances of being caught get higher everyday.
Do people get a thrill from speeding, simply because it is illegal????
Don't look for excuses.. quiet road, late at night, my neighbours parrot was sick... you got caught, just take your punishment, and stop crying.
Good luck though.
BB
12 July 2004, 12:31 PM
#116
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Far Corfe
Posts: 3,618
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The maximum legal speed limit is not necessarily the speed at which it becomes unsafe. In some instances the legal maximum for a particular stretch of road under certain conditions could be extremely unsafe and downright dangerous. You may be exceeding the legal maximum speed and not be unsafe. However to exceed the maximum speed limit, be that 30, 40, 50, 60 or 70 is to break the law. Simple.
Its also illegal to buy mince pies on Christmas day.
Its also illegal to buy mince pies on Christmas day.
12 July 2004, 01:40 PM
#117
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Feb 2001
Posts: 9,307
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
some ppl like to drag stuff out dont they!
going 128 is very dangerous, i would never do it because of the danger. To me, and my family the danger is to great and all too clear.
Is it a dnager of crashing...no, not really- the danger is you get caught and banned.......and if that aint the truth tell me im lyin!
on that basis...and we ALL know the danger, i regard anyone who drives in that "danger zone" as being an idiot. even more so if they say" but it was safe"....because it clearly wasnt as they are now going to be buying a bike to get to work...doesnt seem very safe to me.
i'd loose my job, my house, etc, etc if i was banned......personally, i'd rather crash!
going 128 is very dangerous, i would never do it because of the danger. To me, and my family the danger is to great and all too clear.
Is it a dnager of crashing...no, not really- the danger is you get caught and banned.......and if that aint the truth tell me im lyin!
on that basis...and we ALL know the danger, i regard anyone who drives in that "danger zone" as being an idiot. even more so if they say" but it was safe"....because it clearly wasnt as they are now going to be buying a bike to get to work...doesnt seem very safe to me.
i'd loose my job, my house, etc, etc if i was banned......personally, i'd rather crash!
01 September 2004, 10:45 AM
#118
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 2000
Posts: 438
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A happy end to a long story
Case dismissed in court yesterday due to lack of evidence. Calibration certificate was not produced by CPS despite 6.5 months wait for it and neither prosecution witnesses (plods) showed up for my trial.
Hence case dismissed for reasons of natural justice and costs awarded to me.
Magistrates gave the prosecutor a right royal bollocking as well and described the CPS/Police actions of the last 6 months as farcical and a complete waste of tax payers money.
Just goes to prove if you hold out for the right information, ignore a few *** jockeys in SN threads, then things can work out for the good.
Case dismissed in court yesterday due to lack of evidence. Calibration certificate was not produced by CPS despite 6.5 months wait for it and neither prosecution witnesses (plods) showed up for my trial.
Hence case dismissed for reasons of natural justice and costs awarded to me.
Magistrates gave the prosecutor a right royal bollocking as well and described the CPS/Police actions of the last 6 months as farcical and a complete waste of tax payers money.
Just goes to prove if you hold out for the right information, ignore a few *** jockeys in SN threads, then things can work out for the good.
