From: Ret. on
Adrian wrote:
> bod <bodron57(a)tiscali.co.uk> gurgled happily, sounding much like they
> were saying:
>
>>>>>> I never ever exceed any speed limit by more than a few mph - and
>>>>>> I believe that people who drive considerably in excess of the
>>>>>> speed limits deserve to get booked.
>
>>>>> Regardless of conditions?
>
>>>> Regardless of conditions. They know what the limit is. If they are
>>>> stupid enough to risk prosecution and a ban by driving well in
>>>> excess of that limit then, yes, they deserve to be be booked. The
>>>> police allow a generous margin before prosecution - exceeding that
>>>> by a large margin is really just taking the mick.
>
>> Well, that's his point of view and to be fair, it's hard to argue
>> against it, because technically he's correct.
>
> Maybe, maybe not. He's correct in that it's committing an offence -
> exceeding the speed limit. We could argue "deserve" all day - but
> ICBA.
>
> My point is that that's where he heads rapidly into hypocrisy - since
> he admits to frequently committing the exact same offence. Apparently,
> though, he _doesn't_ "deserve" to be nicked.

Do you not accept that in most types of offence there are degrees of
offending? The more serious the offence - the heavier the punishment. Minor
breaches may well only attract a ticking-off from a police officer. Very
serious breaches may will result in jail time - and for the same offence.

--
Kev

From: Ret. on
mileburner wrote:
> <boltar2003(a)boltar.world> wrote in message
> news:i0hr6p$k37$1(a)speranza.aioe.org...
>> On 1 Jul 2010 10:26:14 GMT
>> Adrian <toomany2cvs(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>>> If the law is the law and to be obeyed because it's the law, then...
>>
>> Traffic laws have - thankfully - always been enforced rather flexibly
>> since its quite easy to go a few mph over the limit by mistake. Its
>> rather harder to nick something from a shop by mistake despite
>> Richard Madeley trying to convince us otherwise a few years back.
>
> Yebbut... If the limit is an upper limit, not to be exceeded, common
> sense suggests that to avoid going over that limit you should drive
> below the limit. What we have though is a culture of "I won't get
> caught if I only go over the limit a little" and a law enforcement
> system which actually allows people to break the law if it is only a
> little bit. This is the thin end of the wedge. What them happens is
> that it is generally considered OK to drive a 35 in a 30 limit.
>
> That actually makes a mockery out of speed limits. Stay below 100mph
> on the motorway and you will probably keep your licence. Sheesh. What
> *is* the point of a law system like that? <rolls eyes>

So would you prefer a zero tolerance approach? 1 mph over the limit and you
are nicked?

--
Kev

From: Ret. on
bod wrote:
> Adrian wrote:
>> bod <bodron57(a)tiscali.co.uk> gurgled happily, sounding much like
>> they were saying:
>>
>>>>> Well, *those* are the laws and you've just mentioned them. They
>>>>> are quite clear, so you or anyone else knows where the lines are
>>>>> drawn. What's the problem with the clarity of them then?
>>
>>>> There is none. To those who can comprehend the difference between
>>>> "the law" and some leeway in enforcing it.
>>
>>> But the speed limit laws *allow* a couple of mph over the limit.
>>
>> Do they, indeed...?
>>
>> Care to come up with any authoritative reference to that?
>>
>>
>
> I'll leave that to our resident expert, Kev.

The 'law' does not allow for a margin. The prosecuting authorities do that.
A police officer, off his own bat, can decide whether to verbally caution or
prosecute. For the sake of uniformity in relation to this, ACPO has come up
with suggested margins that officers are recommended to follow.

--
Kev

From: bod on
Ret. wrote:
> bod wrote:
>> Adrian wrote:
>>> bod <bodron57(a)tiscali.co.uk> gurgled happily, sounding much like
>>> they were saying:
>>>
>>>>>> Well, *those* are the laws and you've just mentioned them. They
>>>>>> are quite clear, so you or anyone else knows where the lines are
>>>>>> drawn. What's the problem with the clarity of them then?
>>>
>>>>> There is none. To those who can comprehend the difference between
>>>>> "the law" and some leeway in enforcing it.
>>>
>>>> But the speed limit laws *allow* a couple of mph over the limit.
>>>
>>> Do they, indeed...?
>>>
>>> Care to come up with any authoritative reference to that?
>>>
>>>
>>
>> I'll leave that to our resident expert, Kev.
>
> The 'law' does not allow for a margin. The prosecuting authorities do
> that. A police officer, off his own bat, can decide whether to verbally
> caution or prosecute. For the sake of uniformity in relation to this,
> ACPO has come up with suggested margins that officers are recommended to
> follow.
>

Fair enough and thanks. That's cleared that up.

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

> Ret. wrote:
>> And, of course, 32 in a 30 is *always* dangerous is it not? You must be
>> very frightened when driving on the continent. Their 50 km speed limit
>> is the equivalent of a horrific 31 mph.

> I thought 50km was the equivalent to about 35mph?.....no?

No. It's 31mph almost exactly.

Similarly, the 150kph on some Italian autostrada is closing on 95mph.