Man fined after driving into his own driveway
in [UK Drivers]
|
Prev: The horrors of biofuels.
Next: Start/Stop "ECO" cars
From: Mike P on 28 Apr 2010 18:55 On Wed, 28 Apr 2010 12:25:45 -0700, NM sang, in the style of Bill Bailey: > On 28 Apr, 14:51, "Brimstone" <brimst...(a)hotmail.com> wrote: >> "Jethro" <krazyka...(a)googlemail.com> wrote in message >> >> news:1ee1b7fa-0e27-4217-82d3- f4857f470c73(a)k33g2000yqc.googlegroups.com... >> >> >> >> > On 28 Apr, 13:41, Adrian <toomany2...(a)gmail.com> wrote: >> >> PhilO <goo18...(a)yahoo.co.uk> gurgled happily, sounding much like >> >> they were >> >> saying: >> >> >> > They told him he was committing an offence because he was >> >> > stationary on the zigzag markings of the crossing and told him to >> >> > move on. But when they returned after driving a mile up the road >> >> > he was still there, waiting for his chance to reverse into the >> >> > house" >> >> >> He was warned. >> >> He ignored the warning. >> >> He got nicked. >> >> >> Any sympathy just evaporated. >> >> > indeed. >> >> > It's amazing how many of these "POLICE HARASS INNOCENT BRITS" Daily- >> > Heil type headlines turn out on deeper inspection to be down to the >> > "inncoent brit" rather than police malice. >> >> Not police malice. More individual police officers sticking to the >> letter of the law rather than the spirit and using some common sense. > > But wouldn't it have been a whole lot better, less paperwork and good > police public relations for them to stop the traffic allow him to back > in then discussed their view of how he should avoid infringment in > future, result smiles all round and job done. Instead we have ill > feeling and long faces, what happened to common sense, I agree with the > earlier poster, this country is fucked. It's only fucked for people like you, who appear to be unable to think for themselves and seek to blame "someone else" for their own failings. Why *should* a copper help this guy? They asked him to move, he didn't. He needs to learn the HC properly for a start. Mike P --
From: Brimstone on 28 Apr 2010 19:02 "Mike P" <frenchtat(a)googlemail.com> wrote in message news:hraecp$amd$2(a)news.eternal-september.org... > On Wed, 28 Apr 2010 12:25:45 -0700, NM sang, in the style of Bill Bailey: > >> On 28 Apr, 14:51, "Brimstone" <brimst...(a)hotmail.com> wrote: >>> "Jethro" <krazyka...(a)googlemail.com> wrote in message >>> >>> news:1ee1b7fa-0e27-4217-82d3- > f4857f470c73(a)k33g2000yqc.googlegroups.com... >>> >>> >>> >>> > On 28 Apr, 13:41, Adrian <toomany2...(a)gmail.com> wrote: >>> >> PhilO <goo18...(a)yahoo.co.uk> gurgled happily, sounding much like >>> >> they were >>> >> saying: >>> >>> >> > They told him he was committing an offence because he was >>> >> > stationary on the zigzag markings of the crossing and told him to >>> >> > move on. But when they returned after driving a mile up the road >>> >> > he was still there, waiting for his chance to reverse into the >>> >> > house" >>> >>> >> He was warned. >>> >> He ignored the warning. >>> >> He got nicked. >>> >>> >> Any sympathy just evaporated. >>> >>> > indeed. >>> >>> > It's amazing how many of these "POLICE HARASS INNOCENT BRITS" Daily- >>> > Heil type headlines turn out on deeper inspection to be down to the >>> > "inncoent brit" rather than police malice. >>> >>> Not police malice. More individual police officers sticking to the >>> letter of the law rather than the spirit and using some common sense. >> >> But wouldn't it have been a whole lot better, less paperwork and good >> police public relations for them to stop the traffic allow him to back >> in then discussed their view of how he should avoid infringment in >> future, result smiles all round and job done. Instead we have ill >> feeling and long faces, what happened to common sense, I agree with the >> earlier poster, this country is fucked. > > It's only fucked for people like you, who appear to be unable to think > for themselves and seek to blame "someone else" for their own failings. > > Why *should* a copper help this guy? Because it's the sensible thing to do. Compare the cost to the taxpayer of stopping the traffic for a couple of minutes while the chap reverses into his drive way ( which I suspect he's done many time before) compared to the cost of taking him through the court system and the resulting bad publicity. > They asked him to move, he didn't. > He needs to learn the HC properly for a start. > And those who put design and implement road layouts need to take heed of what's adjacent. AIUI the law re zig-zags says that one must not park. He wasn't parked, he was stopped.
From: Brimstone on 28 Apr 2010 19:03 "Mike P" <frenchtat(a)googlemail.com> wrote in message news:hraea6$amd$1(a)news.eternal-september.org... > On Wed, 28 Apr 2010 18:15:05 +0100, Brimstone sang, in the style of Bill > Bailey: > >> "Ian Jackson" <ianREMOVETHISjackson(a)g3ohx.demon.co.uk> wrote in message >> news:RLuYI+OndF2LFwVK(a)g3ohx.demon.co.uk... >>> In message <83r289Ffg5U3(a)mid.individual.net>, Adrian >>> <toomany2cvs(a)gmail.com> writes >>>>Ian Jackson <ianREMOVETHISjackson(a)g3ohx.demon.co.uk> gurgled happily, >>>>sounding much like they were saying: >>>> >>>>> However, rather than fine him, I'm sure that there was a more >>>>> sensible solution to the problem. >>>> >>>>Indeed. >>>> >>>>They could have stopped, advised him of the problem, and requested him >>>>to move on. >>>> >>>>Oh, wait. They did. He didn't. >>> >>> No. What they could have done was to point out to him that, if he >>> continued to do what he was doing, they would have no alternative but >>> to issue a penalty (if necessary, pointing out why this law had been >>> made). They then should have discussed the problem with him, and helped >>> him find a practical solution which didn't involve him reversing into >>> the road (which is probably just as dangerous). -- > > >> Indeed, they could have stopped the oncoming traffic for him and allowed >> him to reverse into his driveway. A lot cheaper and more likely to make >> a "friend" than prosecuting him. Sadly such a common sense action seems >> to be beyond the wit of many in authority these days. > > Why should they? What happens tomorrow when he needs to do it again, and > the day after that? He should read a highway code and learn about road > markings for a start. > > They asked him to move on, he didn't, he got a fine. > > Serves him right. So your solution to the problem is what exactly?
From: Steve Firth on 28 Apr 2010 19:48 Ian Jackson <ianREMOVETHISjackson(a)g3ohx.demon.co.uk> wrote: > Looking at the photographs, it's pretty obvious that the house is fairly > old (1920s or 30s?). If so, the zig-zag lines are very much a > late-comer. It seems unreasonable that their addition should prevent > anyone from using their driveway as normal. Right... and my own home is 300 years old, so it pre-dates all traffic signals, road signs, speed restrictions, painted lines etc. By your reasoning I shouldn't have to obey any traffic laws?
From: JNugent on 28 Apr 2010 20:12
Brimstone wrote: > > > "Mike P" <frenchtat(a)googlemail.com> wrote in message > news:hraecp$amd$2(a)news.eternal-september.org... >> On Wed, 28 Apr 2010 12:25:45 -0700, NM sang, in the style of Bill Bailey: >> >>> On 28 Apr, 14:51, "Brimstone" <brimst...(a)hotmail.com> wrote: >>>> "Jethro" <krazyka...(a)googlemail.com> wrote in message >>>> >>>> news:1ee1b7fa-0e27-4217-82d3- >> f4857f470c73(a)k33g2000yqc.googlegroups.com... >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> > On 28 Apr, 13:41, Adrian <toomany2...(a)gmail.com> wrote: >>>> >> PhilO <goo18...(a)yahoo.co.uk> gurgled happily, sounding much like >>>> >> they were >>>> >> saying: >>>> >>>> >> > They told him he was committing an offence because he was >>>> >> > stationary on the zigzag markings of the crossing and told him to >>>> >> > move on. But when they returned after driving a mile up the road >>>> >> > he was still there, waiting for his chance to reverse into the >>>> >> > house" >>>> >>>> >> He was warned. >>>> >> He ignored the warning. >>>> >> He got nicked. >>>> >>>> >> Any sympathy just evaporated. >>>> >>>> > indeed. >>>> >>>> > It's amazing how many of these "POLICE HARASS INNOCENT BRITS" Daily- >>>> > Heil type headlines turn out on deeper inspection to be down to the >>>> > "inncoent brit" rather than police malice. >>>> >>>> Not police malice. More individual police officers sticking to the >>>> letter of the law rather than the spirit and using some common sense. >>> >>> But wouldn't it have been a whole lot better, less paperwork and good >>> police public relations for them to stop the traffic allow him to back >>> in then discussed their view of how he should avoid infringment in >>> future, result smiles all round and job done. Instead we have ill >>> feeling and long faces, what happened to common sense, I agree with the >>> earlier poster, this country is fucked. >> >> It's only fucked for people like you, who appear to be unable to think >> for themselves and seek to blame "someone else" for their own failings. >> >> Why *should* a copper help this guy? > > Because it's the sensible thing to do. Compare the cost to the taxpayer > of stopping the traffic for a couple of minutes while the chap reverses > into his drive way ( which I suspect he's done many time before) > compared to the cost of taking him through the court system and the > resulting bad publicity. > >> They asked him to move, he didn't. >> He needs to learn the HC properly for a start. >> > And those who put design and implement road layouts need to take heed of > what's adjacent. > > AIUI the law re zig-zags says that one must not park. He wasn't parked, > he was stopped. Precisely. If one were not allowed to *stop* on a zig-zag, all sorts of unpleasant things might happen. > > |