Fines for red light jumping and other offences
in [UK Drivers]
|
From: Derek C on 31 Jul 2010 05:38 On Jul 31, 10:28 am, Ian Jackson <ianREMOVETHISjack...(a)g3ohx.demon.co.uk> wrote: > In message <8bi4rrFhb...(a)mid.individual.net>, Matt B > <matt.bou...(a)nospam.london.com> writes > > > > >On 31/07/2010 09:00, Derek C wrote: > >> On Jul 31, 8:47 am, Matt B<matt.bou...(a)nospam.london.com> wrote: > >>> On 31/07/2010 08:39, Derek C wrote: > > >>> Do you believe that most sets of traffic lights give more benefit than > >>> dis-benefit for most of the time? Would our access roads and streets be > >>> safer, less congested and polluted and more enjoyable places without them? > > >> It seems to me that some sets of traffic lights are deliberately > >> designed to slow up motorised traffic as much as possible, especially > >> in motorist hating Labour controlled boroughs.Some lights change so > >> quickly that only a few vehicles at a time can get through, while > >> others keep you waiting at the red light for ages, long after all the > >> traffic going in the other direction has got through the junction. > > >The dead phase of all-red is the real congestion and pollution creator. > > Except for those where the dead phase is measured in microseconds. Generally the dead all-red phase is about 2 seconds. > >> However most traffic lights are reasonably sensible. > > >At all times? Could they be switched off at, say, night? There are a number of 'part time' traffic lights in my area that are switched off outside the rush hours > Don't they do this, on the Continent? Crossroads show flashing amber for > all directions, and then it's the usual continental 'priorité à droite'. > > >> If you didn't > >> have traffic lights, you might find it difficult to enter a main road > >> from a minor one with give way signs at busy times of day. > > >What if you didn't have give-way limes or signs either, and there was > >no defined priority - just an imaginatively cobbled or garishly painted > >free-for-all zone in the middle? This is the case when traffic lights > >break down (except for the cobbled or painted bit!), and in such > >circumstances the junctions generally flow more efficiently. > > Apart from the bit about 'no defined priority', you are well on the way > to inventing the (mini) roundabout! Yuk! 'After you'. 'No after you'. Crunch! > >What about the danger of RLJers (deliberate or erroneous) - that risk > >would disappear if there was no red (and no green) light? Probably fewer traffic offences, but more collisions. Derek C
From: Tony Raven on 31 Jul 2010 05:39 Derek C wrote: > > How often do cyclists get fined? Fairly often but they usually accept the FPN of �30. If they contest any such penalty and take it to Court then they will usually get hit with a much bigger fine plus costs if they are found guilty to discourage people from clogging up the Courts contesting them. All of your examples and mine appear to be people who have contested it in Court. -- Tony " I would never die for my beliefs because I might be wrong." Bertrand Russell
From: Derek C on 31 Jul 2010 05:55 On Jul 31, 10:39 am, Tony Raven <tra...(a)gotadsl.co.uk> wrote: > Derek C wrote: > > > How often do cyclists get fined? > > Fairly often but they usually accept the FPN of £30. If they contest > any such penalty and take it to Court then they will usually get hit > with a much bigger fine plus costs if they are found guilty to > discourage people from clogging up the Courts contesting them. All of > your examples and mine appear to be people who have contested it in Court.. > > -- > Tony > Come on Tony! Once in a blue moon, the Police send a few junior officers out for an hour or two to nick a few cyclists, because of political pressure from the general public who are fed up with their law breaking antics. They can't be caught by cameras because of their lack of registration plates, unlike cars. Derek
From: Brimstone on 31 Jul 2010 06:01 "Derek C" <del.copeland(a)tiscali.co.uk> wrote in message news:83ae43f9-8c88-45cf-88d4-4905ae176512(a)f33g2000yqe.googlegroups.com... > On Jul 31, 10:28 am, Ian Jackson > <ianREMOVETHISjack...(a)g3ohx.demon.co.uk> wrote: >> In message <8bi4rrFhb...(a)mid.individual.net>, Matt B >> <matt.bou...(a)nospam.london.com> writes >> >> >> >> >On 31/07/2010 09:00, Derek C wrote: >> >> On Jul 31, 8:47 am, Matt B<matt.bou...(a)nospam.london.com> wrote: >> >>> On 31/07/2010 08:39, Derek C wrote: >> >> >>> Do you believe that most sets of traffic lights give more benefit >> >>> than >> >>> dis-benefit for most of the time? Would our access roads and streets >> >>> be >> >>> safer, less congested and polluted and more enjoyable places without >> >>> them? >> >> >> It seems to me that some sets of traffic lights are deliberately >> >> designed to slow up motorised traffic as much as possible, especially >> >> in motorist hating Labour controlled boroughs.Some lights change so >> >> quickly that only a few vehicles at a time can get through, while >> >> others keep you waiting at the red light for ages, long after all the >> >> traffic going in the other direction has got through the junction. >> >> >The dead phase of all-red is the real congestion and pollution creator. >> >> Except for those where the dead phase is measured in microseconds. > > Generally the dead all-red phase is about 2 seconds. > >> >> However most traffic lights are reasonably sensible. >> >> >At all times? Could they be switched off at, say, night? > > There are a number of 'part time' traffic lights in my area that are > switched off outside the rush hours > >> Don't they do this, on the Continent? Crossroads show flashing amber for >> all directions, and then it's the usual continental 'priorit� � droite'. >> >> >> If you didn't >> >> have traffic lights, you might find it difficult to enter a main road >> >> from a minor one with give way signs at busy times of day. >> >> >What if you didn't have give-way limes or signs either, and there was >> >no defined priority - just an imaginatively cobbled or garishly painted >> >free-for-all zone in the middle? This is the case when traffic lights >> >break down (except for the cobbled or painted bit!), and in such >> >circumstances the junctions generally flow more efficiently. >> >> Apart from the bit about 'no defined priority', you are well on the way >> to inventing the (mini) roundabout! > > Yuk! 'After you'. 'No after you'. Crunch! > >> >What about the danger of RLJers (deliberate or erroneous) - that risk >> >would disappear if there was no red (and no green) light? > > Probably fewer traffic offences, but more collisions. > In places where this has been implemented the traffic flows better and with fewer collisions because people are forced to look and take notice of what's going on around them.
From: brass monkey on 31 Jul 2010 06:07
"Matt B" <matt.bourke(a)nospam.london.com> wrote in message news:8bi4rrFhbrU1(a)mid.individual.net... > On 31/07/2010 09:00, Derek C wrote: >> On Jul 31, 8:47 am, Matt B<matt.bou...(a)nospam.london.com> wrote: >>> On 31/07/2010 08:39, Derek C wrote: >>> >>> Do you believe that most sets of traffic lights give more benefit than >>> dis-benefit for most of the time? Would our access roads and streets be >>> safer, less congested and polluted and more enjoyable places without >>> them? >> >> It seems to me that some sets of traffic lights are deliberately >> designed to slow up motorised traffic as much as possible, especially >> in motorist hating Labour controlled boroughs.Some lights change so >> quickly that only a few vehicles at a time can get through, while >> others keep you waiting at the red light for ages, long after all the >> traffic going in the other direction has got through the junction. > > The dead phase of all-red is the real congestion and pollution creator. > >> However most traffic lights are reasonably sensible. > > At all times? Could they be switched off at, say, night? > >> If you didn't >> have traffic lights, you might find it difficult to enter a main road >> from a minor one with give way signs at busy times of day. > > What if you didn't have give-way limes or signs either, and there was no > defined priority - just an imaginatively cobbled or garishly painted > free-for-all zone in the middle? This is the case when traffic lights > break down (except for the cobbled or painted bit!), and in such > circumstances the junctions generally flow more efficiently. In my experience that is ALWAYS the case, never a queue when they're defunct. > What about the danger of RLJers (deliberate or erroneous) - that risk > would disappear if there was no red (and no green) light? |