M6 motorway speeds?
in [UK Drivers]
|
From: Adrian on 30 Jun 2010 05:25 bod <bodron57(a)tiscali.co.uk> gurgled happily, sounding much like they were saying: > Doesn't detract from the fact, that you did get done and Kev hasn't. Which doesn't detract from the fact that that's got nothing to do with safe use of speed appropriate for the conditions.
From: bod on 30 Jun 2010 05:36 Adrian wrote: > bod <bodron57(a)tiscali.co.uk> gurgled happily, sounding much like they were > saying: > >>>> But the reality is, if he drives under the speed that the police will >>>> actually act, then he will never be prosecuted. You're just being >>>> pedantic. > >>> Erm no, he's speeding. >>> >>> Is it ok to steal from an empty shop because there's no one there to >>> catch you? > >> Of course not. > > So, for you, the problem lies in the commission of the offence - rather > than in the likelihood of being caught doing it. > > For Kev, it appears the opposite is true. He is quite happy to break the > limit, but is careful to only do so when the risk of being caught is > absolutely minimal. > > Unless, of course, it's somehow different because speeding is victimless > and sometimes speeds above the limit are perfectly safe and appropriate? > > I'm sure that Kev would consider the road conditions etc and adjust his speed accordingly, especially if doing 32mph was at all a risk, in just the same way as you would speed on a rural road, if the conditions were safe. You *are* being pedantic, IMO. Bod
From: bod on 30 Jun 2010 05:39 Adrian wrote: > bod <bodron57(a)tiscali.co.uk> gurgled happily, sounding much like they were > saying: > >>>> 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? > >> The former, but that is a loaded question. > > Only in that it's difficult to give a straight answer and conform to Kev's > standpoint - that it's primarily the risk of being caught which is the > upper bound of acceptable speeds above the limit. > > I'm sure Kev doesn't just mindlessly push the speed limit without giving due consideration to the conditions at the time. Bod
From: Mike P on 30 Jun 2010 05:42 On 30 June, 10:39, bod <bodro...(a)tiscali.co.uk> wrote: > Adrian wrote: > > bod <bodro...(a)tiscali.co.uk> gurgled happily, sounding much like they were > > saying: > > >>>> 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? > > >> The former, but that is a loaded question. > > > Only in that it's difficult to give a straight answer and conform to Kev's > > standpoint - that it's primarily the risk of being caught which is the > > upper bound of acceptable speeds above the limit. > > > > > > > I'm sure Kev doesn't just mindlessly push the speed limit without > giving due consideration to the conditions at the time. Neither do I. The difference here is that I have a mind. Kevin doesn't appear to. He doesn't appear to think about anything, just blindly follows rules written by the ACPO, or believes whatever he sees in the Wail/ Telegraph etc. I expect he's one of those idiots you see charging through a 50 zone at 58 in heavy traffic in pissing rain, because it's the speed limit and he knows he won't get done because the ACPO says so. Mike P
From: bod on 30 Jun 2010 05:42
Adrian wrote: > 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? > >> Not really. One is pushing the limits of driving and the other is >> about foreigners and integration issues. > > I said attitudes. Not topics. The difference is fairly straightforward. > > The attitude is utterly consistent. However Kev chooses to live his life > is not only acceptable, but forms the basis of the only acceptable way of > life. No significant deviation from that can be acceptable to him. > > Set in his ways is what you are trying to portray, I think. If that is what you mean, then, I agree, but then, we are not all the same. Bod |