Do you enjoy driving?

[joe-90]

The law also demands that you drive with due care and consideration for other road users and that is why you will be pulled if you have an opportunity to let others pass and don't do so.

Not if you are travelling at the speed limit and have no opportunity to pull into the left lane as is usually the case on the M1.

I follow ALL the rules of the road - how about you?

 

[megawatt]

To say you would NEVER have an opportunity to let people pass Joe is just sheer idiotic nonsense and in all my years of driving I can't say I've ever been in that position when the traffic is flowing normally.

And yes I do drive within the law but don't see it as my role to police other people's driving ... If I'm driving at 70mph and someone wants to go faster than me then I move over, let them pass and then move back into the fast lane and carry on ... What's the problem?

 

[nickso]

It makes no difference what the Police think. The maximum speed permitted by law on our roads is 70mph. If it were permissible to travel at 80 mph then the speed limits would show 80mph.

If you were driving in a 30 zone and doing 35 and you struck a child then there would be the much greater likelihood that that child would die. As the TV advert says - IT'S 30 FOR A REASON.

If a pedestrian is struck at 30 mph then 80% will live.

If a pedestrian is stuck at 40 mph - the 80% of them will die.

So where does your 10% rule fit in?

In many cities the limit is to be reduced to 20mph so the authorities clearly disagree with your 10% rule.

Joe. It's NOT my rule. Most of the Constabularies around the country have adopted this "rule" for want of a better word.

They have decided to allow 10% for inaccuracies of speedos and their variation between vehicles.

If councils do reduce inner city limits to 20mph, then the same "rule" will be applied, ie anything over 24mph in a 20 zone will attract attention.

Of course, the signs don't have an asterix next to the number with a disclaimer at the bottom which says,

"MAXIMUM SPEED PERMITTED SUBJECT TO AN ADDITIONAL 10% FOR SPEEDOMETER INACCURACIES PLUS A FURTHER 2 MPH."

But, like it or not, that is how most speed limits are interpreted.

I'm sorry to say that you have just shot down your own argument.

If I travel at 70mph and there is a 10% discrepancy - then I will be travelling at 77mph - which you are adamant is OK.

However, if you travel at what your speedo says is 80mph - then due to the discrepancy you may actually be travelling at 88mph - way above the 70mph limit.

You cannot get away from the fact that the legal limit in this country is 70 mph - and I have every right to adhere to it.

are you trying to be thick?

if i know my speedo is reading 77mph and i know i am actually doing 70 where is the problem? im doing the speed limit....you are most likely doing 65 ish

 

[Steve]

just because it says 50 doesnt mean you have to do it.

Ah, ah! But!!! At least let me pass!

 

[joe-90]

There isn't one. The traffic in the left lane is trucks travelling at 60mph.
I am overtaking them at 70mph.
Idiots can use the right lane and risk prosecution and do 80mph.

What's the problem?

 

[joe-90]

It makes no difference what the Police think. The maximum speed permitted by law on our roads is 70mph. If it were permissible to travel at 80 mph then the speed limits would show 80mph.

If you were driving in a 30 zone and doing 35 and you struck a child then there would be the much greater likelihood that that child would die. As the TV advert says - IT'S 30 FOR A REASON.

If a pedestrian is struck at 30 mph then 80% will live.

If a pedestrian is stuck at 40 mph - the 80% of them will die.

So where does your 10% rule fit in?

In many cities the limit is to be reduced to 20mph so the authorities clearly disagree with your 10% rule.

Joe. It's NOT my rule. Most of the Constabularies around the country have adopted this "rule" for want of a better word.

They have decided to allow 10% for inaccuracies of speedos and their variation between vehicles.

If councils do reduce inner city limits to 20mph, then the same "rule" will be applied, ie anything over 24mph in a 20 zone will attract attention.

Of course, the signs don't have an asterix next to the number with a disclaimer at the bottom which says,

"MAXIMUM SPEED PERMITTED SUBJECT TO AN ADDITIONAL 10% FOR SPEEDOMETER INACCURACIES PLUS A FURTHER 2 MPH."

But, like it or not, that is how most speed limits are interpreted.

I'm sorry to say that you have just shot down your own argument.

If I travel at 70mph and there is a 10% discrepancy - then I will be travelling at 77mph - which you are adamant is OK.

However, if you travel at what your speedo says is 80mph - then due to the discrepancy you may actually be travelling at 88mph - way above the 70mph limit.

You cannot get away from the fact that the legal limit in this country is 70 mph - and I have every right to adhere to it.

are you trying to be thick?

if i know my speedo is reading 77mph and i know i am actually doing 70 where is the problem? im doing the speed limit....you are most likely doing 65 ish

I KNOW the accuracy of my speedo - and maintain a constant 70mph - just as the law says I must. Write to your MP if you don't like it.

 

[Steve]

In my opinion this thread now serves no useful purpose. Conflicts of opinions.

 

[joe-90]

In my opinion this thread now serves no useful purpose. Conflicts of opinions.

There is no conflict. I know the speed I am travelling and it is the maximum speed the law says I may travel at. Are you a criminal?

 

[megawatt]

Joe-70 and not 1 mph more wrote:

There isn't one. The traffic in the left lane is trucks travelling at 60mph.
I am overtaking them at 70mph.
Idiots can use the right lane and risk prosecution and do 80mph.
What's the problem?

I think, looking back over this thread, it's pretty clear to everyone that actually the only problem is ... Well, you Joe actually.

Never mind.

Steve Wrote:

In my opinion this thread now serves no useful purpose. Conflicts of opinions.

Probably true though the conflict is between a single individual and pretty much everyone else ... Which is actually becoming the norm with J90.

Ho hum

 

[securespark]

It makes no difference what the Police think. The maximum speed permitted by law on our roads is 70mph. If it were permissible to travel at 80 mph then the speed limits would show 80mph.

If you were driving in a 30 zone and doing 35 and you struck a child then there would be the much greater likelihood that that child would die. As the TV advert says - IT'S 30 FOR A REASON.

If a pedestrian is struck at 30 mph then 80% will live.

If a pedestrian is stuck at 40 mph - the 80% of them will die.

So where does your 10% rule fit in?

In many cities the limit is to be reduced to 20mph so the authorities clearly disagree with your 10% rule.

Joe. It's NOT my rule. Most of the Constabularies around the country have adopted this "rule" for want of a better word.

They have decided to allow 10% for inaccuracies of speedos and their variation between vehicles.

If councils do reduce inner city limits to 20mph, then the same "rule" will be applied, ie anything over 24mph in a 20 zone will attract attention.

Of course, the signs don't have an asterix next to the number with a disclaimer at the bottom which says,

"MAXIMUM SPEED PERMITTED SUBJECT TO AN ADDITIONAL 10% FOR SPEEDOMETER INACCURACIES PLUS A FURTHER 2 MPH."

But, like it or not, that is how most speed limits are interpreted.

I'm sorry to say that you have just shot down your own argument.

If I travel at 70mph and there is a 10% discrepancy - then I will be travelling at 77mph - which you are adamant is OK.

However, if you travel at what your speedo says is 80mph - then due to the discrepancy you may actually be travelling at 88mph - way above the 70mph limit.

You cannot get away from the fact that the legal limit in this country is 70 mph - and I have every right to adhere to it.

I don't quite understand what you're saying.

Speedo's will never read "over" by more than 10%.

http://www.theyworkforyou.com/wrans/?id=2001-03-12a.59.3

I also cannot see what you're argument at the end is.

I am not attempting to lure you into exceeding 70mph.

Edited to include link to website.

 

[joe-90]

I am saying that I know what speed I am travelling (70mph) and I have every right to travel at that speed. If you exceed that speed and catch me up - that's your problem - not mine.

 

[nickso]

I KNOW the accuracy of my speedo - and maintain a constant 70mph - just as the law says I must. Write to your MP if you don't like it.

if you know your car is doing true 70 at indicated 70 then thats fine. mine doesnt and thats not what you were getting confused about above.

what did you test your speedo with?

 

[joe-90]

I KNOW the accuracy of my speedo - and maintain a constant 70mph - just as the law says I must. Write to your MP if you don't like it.

if you know your car is doing true 70 at indicated 70 then thats fine. mine doesnt and thats not what you were getting confused about above.

what did you test your speedo with?

There are speed advisory signs around here that activate at 30mph. They all trigger at 32mph on my speedo.

 

[Softus]

The main reason that no-one gets done for driving between 70-80 mph is that the 10% +2mph rule makes the minimum speed at which you can be prosecuted on a 70mph road is 79mph.

"Rule" is an odd word to use. Let's start with the horse's mouth...

The Guidance

ACPO's guidance has been formulated having taken account of the need for proportionality (especially with the introduction of Human Rights legislation) and the need for targeting in order to maximise the potential of scarce police resources and make a substantial contribution to the multi-agency road death and injury reduction effort.

Driving at any speed over the limit is an offence. The differing speed limits are generally related, and proportionate, to the risks to all road users using that road. Where police officers consider that an offence has been committed i.e. that a motorist has driven at any speed over the relevant speed limit, they should consider whether it is appropriate to take enforcement action against the offender.

The Police Service now uses technology that enables it to prove that an offence has been committed as soon as a driver exceeds the relevant speed limit by a very small margin. Motorists will therefore be at risk of prosecution immediately they exceed any legal speed limit.

The guidance to police officers is that it is anticipated that, other than in the most exceptional circumstances, the issue of fixed penalty notices and summonses is likely to be the minimum appropriate enforcement action as soon as the following speeds have been reached:

[code:1]Limit Fixed Penalty Summons
20 mph 25 mph 35 mph
30 mph 35 mph 50 mph
40 mph 46 mph 66 mph
50 mph 57 mph 76 mph
60 mph 68 mph 86 mph
70 mph 79 mph 96 mph[/code:1]

This guidance does not and cannot replace the police officer's discretion and they may decide to issue a summons or a fixed penalty notice in respect of offences committed at speeds lower than those set out in the table. Moreover, in particular circumstances, driving at speeds lower than the legal limit may result in prosecution for other offences, for example dangerous driving or driving without due care and attention when the speed is inappropriate and inherently unsafe.

AFAIK, the reason for the margin is simply one of pragmatism. If there were a zero tolerance policy (as occasionally mooted by an idiotic politician in a misguided vote-winning exercise) then the courts would be clogged with people presenting calibration arguments.

I've never owned a single car that under-reads, and I've owned about 40 of all kinds of makes and ages. The same goes for several motorbikes I've had the pleasure of owning.

In my present car, with 4 brand new tyres, the satnav device disagrees with my speedo by a difference of about 4mph at 40; i.e. I could, if I chose to, do an indicated 50mph and be quietly confident of not being stopped.

I believe that manufacturers deliberate make speedometers that over-read. This increases the safety margin.

Furthermore, as tyres wear down, the speedo will over-read more and more.

It all results in the likelihood that someone doing 80mph is likely to be looking at a speedo that's showing more like 90mph. For that flagrant disregard, no court in the land will be impressed by a whining pratt in the dock.

If you want to get to your destination earlier, then leave earlier.

If you want to speed, then accept the consequences.

And if you are speeding, then it's your responsibility to avoid collisions with cars that aren't.

For example, if you hammer through a 30 zone at 50, and I pull out of a side road into your path, and your skid marks show the truth of the situation, then who do you imagine is going to look like a ****?

__________
typing errors corrected

 

[tim west]

oops 32 in a 30 zone!! dee daw dee daw.