One year ban for 22mph
12 January 2006, 04:17 PM
#1
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 2003
Posts: 1,985
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
One year ban for 22mph
They don't like it up them, it would seem:
http://www.thenewspaper.com/news/08/891.asp
Stupid thing to do in the big brother state. Who will be the first to get a ban for "walking funny" or "wearing mismatched socks" or...
http://www.thenewspaper.com/news/08/891.asp
Stupid thing to do in the big brother state. Who will be the first to get a ban for "walking funny" or "wearing mismatched socks" or...
12 January 2006, 04:23 PM
#4
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Nov 2000
Posts: 26,619
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
12 January 2006, 04:23 PM
#5
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 2003
Posts: 1,985
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yes, i agree. If someone watching a CCTV camera thinks you are probably a tw@t then it is only reasonable that you should get banned from driving. Do you have any particular features or modes of behaviour which might attract the attentions of anyone watching your movements? I presume not.
12 January 2006, 04:23 PM
#6
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Co Durham
Posts: 1,659
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The contention seems to be that he had taken both hands off the wheel to make the gestures thus deemed to be dangerous driving.
As I read somewhere else - you'd probably get less for walking up to the scamera operator and thumping them.
World gone mad IMO - as a motorist in this country you have NO rights in would appear!
As I read somewhere else - you'd probably get less for walking up to the scamera operator and thumping them.
World gone mad IMO - as a motorist in this country you have NO rights in would appear!
Trending Topics
12 January 2006, 04:55 PM
#9
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: same time, different place
Posts: 11,313
Likes: 0
Received 4 Likes
on
2 Posts
Gosh, look at the misleading thread title. Didn't Stalin also issue such kinds of propaganda?
One year ban for driving without hands on the wheel, would be more accurate.
One year ban for driving without hands on the wheel, would be more accurate.
12 January 2006, 04:55 PM
#10
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Are we there yet?
Posts: 893
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ok, yeah he was being a bit of a c@ck and no doubt showing off infront of his mates, but a years ban? Come on, surely no one on here can say that the punishment fitted the crime in this instance.
12 January 2006, 05:12 PM
#11
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Co Durham
Posts: 1,659
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
In comparison the fine for driving while holding a mobile phone is £30 - no points. That's damn near as dangerous - and in this instance we're talking about 22mph. Yet, it's resulted in a year's ban - where is the consistency?
There's no doubt the guy's been a pillock but a warning not to be a prat would have been the sensible and common sense approach IMO.
There's no doubt the guy's been a pillock but a warning not to be a prat would have been the sensible and common sense approach IMO.
12 January 2006, 06:22 PM
#12
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Tellins, Home of Super Leagues finest, and where a "split" is not all it seems.
Posts: 5,504
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
He does look a bit scruffy and had short hair so a ban is only fair.....errr...Oh dear
12 January 2006, 08:11 PM
#13
Scooby Senior
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: West Midlands
Posts: 5,763
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hang on a minute...
before the feds can point the laser at you, they MUST form a PRIOR opinion that you were exceeding the speed limit. This is to stop them simply pointing the speed camera at the apex of a corner and zapping everybody as they come into view.
Now if said fed/civvy/retired-plod had such poor eyesight that he could not tell that a car travelling at nearly half the speed limit was certainly not breaking any laws, why was he taking pictures??? He (or she) must be of such unsound mind that they should never be considered to partake in such an important task (i.e. scamera operator and chief revenue generator).
mb
before the feds can point the laser at you, they MUST form a PRIOR opinion that you were exceeding the speed limit. This is to stop them simply pointing the speed camera at the apex of a corner and zapping everybody as they come into view.
Now if said fed/civvy/retired-plod had such poor eyesight that he could not tell that a car travelling at nearly half the speed limit was certainly not breaking any laws, why was he taking pictures??? He (or she) must be of such unsound mind that they should never be considered to partake in such an important task (i.e. scamera operator and chief revenue generator).
mb
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post