Question about wrongful driving disqualification

Soldato
Joined
30 Dec 2004
Posts
4,681
Location
Bromley, Kent
I'd love to agree but I cannot. If an enforcement officer had seen somebody going too fast, everything would be in thier opinion. There would have to be legal documentation down to either keep the driver safe from prosecution or to be able to prosecute if needed. The trouble would be that everything would then be down to the opinion of the enforcement officer and there would be absoloutly no co-ordination betwwen them. And no speed is not a wrong danger factor, it is one of MANY danger factors. To say otherwise is rediculous. Going too fast in any vehicle increases breaking distance and reduces control.

- Pea0n
 
Man of Honour
Joined
17 Oct 2002
Posts
50,384
Location
Plymouth
I'd love to agree but I cannot. If an enforcement officer had seen somebody going too fast, everything would be in thier opinion. There would have to be legal documentation down to either keep the driver safe from prosecution or to be able to prosecute if needed. The trouble would be that everything would then be down to the opinion of the enforcement officer and there would be absoloutly no co-ordination betwwen them. And no speed is not a wrong danger factor, it is one of MANY danger factors. To say otherwise is rediculous. Going too fast in any vehicle increases breaking distance and reduces control.

- Pea0n

It worked for decades until 1993 when cameras were introduced. Traffic officers can still provide evidence to prosecute without technical measures.

Do you think a housewife in a fiesta doing 60mph would stop before me doing 80mph in my Audi if we both did a full emergency stop? Honestly? What about a sudden emergency manouver? Who do you think would fair better?
 
Soldato
Joined
30 Dec 2004
Posts
4,681
Location
Bromley, Kent
To be honest, if neither of you knew that an event was going to happen theres no guarantee that either of you would succeed in safley negotiating the hazard. Even if the Audi could, there would be no way of saying a second drive in an identicle car would because they are a different person with different abilities.
If you had to react to a hazard, then you might be able to brake in a shorter distance, but in the time it took you to react, your additional speed would have carried you further to compensate for the shorter braking distance and with the need to perform an emergency stop then the hazard would indeed be close enough so that the reduction in braking distance would be far out-weighed by the extra distance travelled due to the extra speed and would probably hit it anyway.

To be honest, rather than derail this any further I think it's best to just agree to disagree. You wont come to my point, I wont come to yours.

- Pea0n
 
Permabanned
Joined
21 Apr 2004
Posts
12,434
Location
Southampton University
Do you think a housewife in a fiesta doing 60mph would stop before me doing 80mph in my Audi if we both did a full emergency stop? Honestly? What about a sudden emergency manouver? Who do you think would fair better?

Surely that just makes the point it's better to legislate for the lowest common denominator because you can't safely assume what every single car is capable of... :p
 
Soldato
Joined
10 Oct 2003
Posts
5,518
Location
Wiltshire
That wasn't what I asked. Are you concerned about road safety or compliance with poorly considered laws?

I care about road safety, hence why I don't approve of the current speed kills idea, given that the government's own stats clearly show that speed is irrelevant to road safety in approx 95% of accidents.

So if the law doesn't make the roads safer, what is the point of it, and is worrying about adherance to the law beneficial to road safety?
You make a fair point. I don't agree with most speed limits, and I routinely speed where I consider it appropriate to do so (outside of residential areas). That said I know what the arbitrary limits are (even if I don't necessarily agree with them) and the penalties for breaking them. There is a difference I think between wilfully speeding with recognition of the consequences if caught, and speeding yet acting all bent out of shape if/when you actually get caught doing it.

If you're going to speed you should be prepared to take the punishment(s) on the chin like a man.
 
Man of Honour
Joined
17 Oct 2002
Posts
50,384
Location
Plymouth
You make a fair point. I don't agree with most speed limits, and I routinely speed where I consider it appropriate to do so (outside of residential areas). That said I know what the limits are and the penalties for breaking them. There is a difference I think between wilfully speeding with recognition of the consequences if caught, and speeding yet acting all bent out of shape if/when you actually get caught doing it.

If you're going to speed you should be prepared to take the punishment(s) on the chin like a man.

But in the case of the OP, the issue is that the state has admitted it was wrong, and the state's behaviour has caused massive cost and inconvience to the OP. Taking it on the chin is entirely irrelevant in this case.
 
Soldato
Joined
18 Oct 2002
Posts
7,700
Location
"Sunny" Plymouth
I cant believe knowbody has asked this already,,, How far over the speed limit were you when this uncalibrated camera caught you?

35in a 30, 45 in a 40, 65 in a 60.... or 40+ in a 30, 50+ in a 40, 70+ in 60 ???

He was probably doing repeated runs at 90mph passed a school at going home time, while waving a chainsaw out of each window.
 
Caporegime
Joined
18 Oct 2002
Posts
33,392
Location
West Yorks
How do you know that? :confused: I'd be very surprised if a court of law took your point of view on this! :)

he's got a point though

The camera lacking a certificate but still being calibrated is very pluasible

in this case, he was speeding, but the evidence of the camera is inadmissable without a certificate to proove its calibrated

speed cameras dont just massively uncalibrate themselves. People do however, forget to renew the certificates in time.


regardless, unless it was a school zone 34 in a 30 is probably not going to hurt anybody anywya.
 
Permabanned
Joined
21 Apr 2004
Posts
12,434
Location
Southampton University
How do you know that? :confused: I'd be very surprised if a court of law took your point of view on this! :)

What?

I never said a court would refuse to let him off or anything, I was just saying he was probably speeding anyway and that not having a certificate of calibration is an awful lot different to actually being uncalibrated.

All the certificates do is provide a paper trail of someone else to blame half the time. In the construction industry for example, equipment has to be calibrated and can only be used with a certificate to show this. If it turns out the equipment was ballsed and your nice new apartments are all on a slope, then you can blame whoever certified the equipment as calibrated. If it didn't have the certificate then it's your fault :p

Just everyone jumping on the 'wrongfully' charged bandwagon, when I reckon chances are he was speeding and the camera was working and calibrated fine, it just doesn't have the required documents, due to someone forgetting to get them renewed, to be able to have it's results stand, hence he's getting off a technicality.
 

Arc

Arc

Associate
Joined
18 Oct 2002
Posts
1,759
Do you think a housewife in a fiesta doing 60mph would stop before me doing 80mph in my Audi if we both did a full emergency stop? Honestly? What about a sudden emergency manouver? Who do you think would fair better?

Depends if the housewife happened to be an ex professional driver or had a suitably modified fiesta ;).

Sounds like you have an overly high opinion of your driving skills. Your probably entitled to that view but you have to remember that you cannot factor in every suitable variable into the equation. Your car could suffer a sudden mechanical failure when you brake, you could suffer from an undiagnosed medical condition that kicks in just when you need to stop...... who knows what can happen.

Anyone that cannot check their speedo and drive safely should in all honesty not be on the road. You may disagree with the rules that are there at present (who does agree with them tbh) but breaking them with such disregard isn't going to help you get them overturned.
 
Back
Top Bottom