From: Steve Firth on
Adrian <toomany2cvs(a)gmail.com> wrote:

> "Mr Pounder" <MrPounder(a)RationalThought.com> gurgled happily, sounding
> much like they were saying:
>
> > Are you really trying to tell me that you averaged 100 mph?
>
> Why do you find it so difficult to comprehend?

Pounder, like Bod and Bloater, finds it difficult to comprehend
anything.
From: Adrian on
Mike P <mikewpearson1(a)gmail.com> gurgled happily, sounding much like they
were saying:

>> > You however think differently because you can get away with it
>> > because of the discrepancy in your speedo.

>> Something of a stupid statement don't you think?  If there is a
>> discrepancy in a speedo (and I've yet to find a UK car without a
>> similar discrepancy to all the cars I've driven), then the speedo is
>> *not* recording your true speed.

> You've admitted it. You've admitted driving at an indicated 35 because
> you know you won't get done, even though it's over 30.
>
> ISTR you've also admitted driving at an indicated 58 or so in roadworks,
> because you know you won't get camera
>
> That's speeding.

Quite. Kev seems to think that the ACPO recommendations actually apply to
the limit, not merely to the enforcement of it.

After all, apparently anybody who exceeds the speed limit is a dangerous
maniac. Except Kev, because he makes sure he only exceeds it just enough
to be able to drive around with eyes firmly closed and know he won't get
nicked.

Remind me of the definition of hypocrisy? No, not the Duhg definition -
although I suspect we're about to see it again - but the dictionary one.
From: Ret. on
Adrian wrote:
> Mike P <mikewpearson1(a)gmail.com> gurgled happily, sounding much like
> they were saying:
>
>>>> You however think differently because you can get away with it
>>>> because of the discrepancy in your speedo.
>
>>> Something of a stupid statement don't you think? If there is a
>>> discrepancy in a speedo (and I've yet to find a UK car without a
>>> similar discrepancy to all the cars I've driven), then the speedo is
>>> *not* recording your true speed.
>
>> You've admitted it. You've admitted driving at an indicated 35
>> because you know you won't get done, even though it's over 30.
>>
>> ISTR you've also admitted driving at an indicated 58 or so in
>> roadworks, because you know you won't get camera
>>
>> That's speeding.
>
> Quite. Kev seems to think that the ACPO recommendations actually
> apply to the limit, not merely to the enforcement of it.
>
> After all, apparently anybody who exceeds the speed limit is a
> dangerous maniac. Except Kev, because he makes sure he only exceeds
> it just enough to be able to drive around with eyes firmly closed and
> know he won't get nicked.
>
> Remind me of the definition of hypocrisy? No, not the Duhg definition
> - although I suspect we're about to see it again - but the dictionary
> one.

If ACPO felt that exceeding speed limits by a few mph was dangerous - then
they would enforce a zero tolerance policy would they not?

It's hilarious being lectured to by two drivers who admit to regularly
exceeding speed limits by huge amounts.

--
Kev

From: Adrian on
bod <bodron57(a)tiscali.co.uk> gurgled happily, sounding much like they were
saying:

>>> So just who is the incompetent one Mike?

>> The big difference here Kevin is that I admit when I'm wrong, and learn
>> from my mistakes.

"The man who never made a mistake never made anything"
and
"Those who fail to learn from history are condemned to repeat it".

>> You just continue making them, and making excuses for your speeding.

> But *he* hasn't been done for speeding. Where's the problem?

Has his licence remained clean because his speed is always appropriate
for the conditions, or has it remained clean because he's careful to only
speed a little bit?

Which is less inappropriate? 32mph through an urban area 30 limit with
many pedestrians or 50mph through a rural 30 with nobody else about and
excellent sightlines?
From: Adrian on
bod <bodron57(a)tiscali.co.uk> gurgled happily, sounding much like they were
saying:

>> It's quite hilarious being lectured and talked down to by a
>> hypocritical racist who lives in the dark ages - both of these points
>> can be verified by your attitudes to women and foreigners in other
>> threads on the legal group.
>>
>> You really are a card Mr Lunn.

> You're changing the subject now. Ahem! it's "Motorway speeds" BTW.

You don't see how the attitudes are related?