Tiggs

Well i saved my clean license!

Quite a good 3 hrs in fact. Couldnt argue with any of their facts and figures and they gave you no room to be anti camera. The jist was...you were speeding, people are getting mashed up on the roads every day - it was easy to catch you.....tough luck.

It was made clear we werent on a course for stupid pedestrians or mobile phone users and yes they may be an issue but thats not what the day was about for us .....we were speeding.

My only "anti the day" moment was when they went round the room asking why the person had speed on the day they were caught.

in a rush, not paying attention was the normal excuse trotted out......got to me:

"i was travelling at an appropriate speed for the road, it was unfortunate for me the authorities disagree"

"ohh, so you know best?"

"yes"

"you do?"

"if you are asking if i knew best the right speed for my car on that road at that time considering all infomation avalible at that time....yes i knew best. Who do you suggest knew better?"

"fair enough"

little victory for me.

What was interesting was the lack of knowledge of joe bloggs.....99% of attendees did not know:

NSL for single/duel and motorway
ways to tell a 30 limit
estimate of speed camera costs - they guess £2-5k!!! (cost £30k)
shown a pic of a ford ka that had left skid marks of 6 car lengths before killing some kid....how fast? best guess was 30mph! actual speed 40+

all of the above i knew and was surprised the others were so way off.

funny bits - picture of a road leaving a 30mph village. NSL sign on exit of village right on a hump back bridge. few people said how dangerous to go over the bridge at 60mph - i pointed out it was up to 60mph not "had to be doing 60mph".....someone said "yes, but once you see the NSL signs you would start to speed up so by the time you got to them and realise they were on a bridge you may be doing 60mph allready!

T

ps- hazard video test used footage of local roads that i knew well.....woodley, reading, henley.......Whitley Wood...on turning into Whitley Wood i clicked the mouse about 20 times simply because even being there was a hazard

Clarebabes

I hate to be ****, but it's "licence"

Pet hate I'm afraid.....

Tiggs

not the way i spell it.

Dunk

iTrader: (1)

D

little-ginge

@ Whitley Wood - **** hole of Berkshire

warrenm2

Ok Claire!

Leslie

I thought you would find it an interesting course Tiggs. Doesn't surprise me how little so many drivers know about the correct way to drive with respect for other road users and also motoring laws and regulations.

Les

simo

lol,

Mark, when are you planning to go to Germany this year? Would be good to catch up & get a few laps in thou I need some new cup tyres to have 1/2 a chance

Simon

Puff The Magic Wagon!

iTrader: (2)

PMSL

ALi-B

iTrader: (1)

Doesn't surpise me one bit.

I bet most of them don't know what the circular white sign, with the thick black diagonal line is meant to signify. (pet hate on the open road )

scoobynutta555

**** number 2, thought it was dual not duel, assuming you mean carriageways

Nice write up of your speed awareness day, and I like the little victory you had.

Tiggs

not the way i spell it

Abdabz

"i was travelling at an appropriate speed for the road, it was unfortunate for me the authorities disagree"

"ohh, so you know best?"

"yes"

"you do?"

"if you are asking if i knew best the right speed for my car on that road at that time considering all infomation avalible at that time....yes i knew best. Who do you suggest knew better?"

For that arrogance and blatant disregard of speed limits/driving law you should have been removed from the room and issued the points... There's no justice

fast bloke

Tiggs - licensed to fight

scoobynutta555

There are many speed limits on roads that I feel are artificially low and consequently ignore them, and in balance on some nsl roads or urban streets drive below the posted limit where to do the posted limit would be dangerous.

I would ban all speed limits and even do away with speedos. I'd put back responsibility with each driver and anyone who causes an accident or drives like a **** would be hit with new and improved laws. Is it right some prat can kill someone in a hit and run and get a very leniant sentance as is the case now?

Hundreds of thousands more convictions for speeding yet are our roads any safer, no chance. Isn't it true that deaths have actually incresed after years of decreasing, coincidently at the same time as cameras were introduced.

carl

What, the wrong way?

Tiggs

my way.



To explain my "defence" above....

The camera location was on a main road with housing either side. All houses had long drives that ended set back from the road. Their way no pedestrians and if there were there were crossings for them within 100 yards either side of the camera.

There were no cars/vehicles on the road within site (either parked or traveling)

So i am driving along at 36......at that speed if i hit a child that appeared in front of me without me having time to brake - he may have been killed......but that was simply not possible. The only "hidden" spot anyone could emerge from would be a drive and it would not be possible to run from a drive to my path without me seeing and avoiding that person.

So 36 was safe.....other parts of the road had parked cars, etc and i was going at 28mph.....in summary i varied my speed around 30 depending on the situation. My mistake was that i "assumed" i was prob doing 34-35 past the camera and would not be flashed......i assumed wrong, but this only has relevance to the camera - not whether i was going too fast for the road.

so i was travelling at a safe speed for the road...simple.

left a few typos in their fore the anul mupits.

pslewis

Whitley Wood ................................. ****-hell-hole of the South, used to smell and it suited it - but, the smell has gone ........ shame the area hasn't!

Pete

unclebuck

LOL That's what you think. Your name will have been covertly entered onto a database for 'special attention' by the authorities in the future.

Enjoy....

Tiggs

interestingly, they had no idea who was who. We signed in as present and that was it.....so all the driving test results were for our benifit only. they had no way of knowing whos results were whos other than the desk numbers...and they had no idea who was at each desk. In other words you could have done shocking in the test and they wouldnt have known!

carl

I'll make sure I use this defence when HMRC tells me I've done my accounts the wrong way.

Tiggs

If you post on SN the same way you do your accounts you either:

a) do very poor accounts

or

b) are the saddest forum poster on earth

carl

Or (c) diligent in everything I write, out of respect for the reader

P1Fanatic

The fact of the matter is that there is NO way for you to know that categorically nothing would happen. If it did then your additional 6mph could be the difference between a kid living or dieing. Thats what speed limits are for.

Simon.

JTaylor

Does this apply across the board or just in built up areas? I'm not trying to pick a fight, just trying to clarify your position

Tiggs

no....its possible a child under harry potters magic cloak could have turned up in front of me - or one roping in from a chopper (delta styleeee).

however, i consider this and assumed the magic could would use the "dodgearamus the ford galaxyurus" charm.....and those delta kids are just tough.

36 mph was fine

Tiggs

b) then?

Richard_P

Is it? Are you sure that speed limits aren't there to stop the people who can't even park between two lines in a car park from killing multiple people through having no sense at all of how to use their car including the speed of it.

It is possible for a highly aware and skilled driver to speed safely, the police know this as you will notice many of their officers driving faster than speed limits. However they couldn't possibly condone this for all as some people cannot place their car where they want to on the road at 5mph, so they certainly aren't in control at 50mph.

Not condoning speeding by the way, not in built up areas, although I have done it like everyone else.

scoobynutta555

If this if that, I love "what if" in a statement cause you can bung anything in there for some hypothetical *arguement*.

"what if" the driver was checking his speedo constantly to obey the 30 limit. Doing this means less eye time for the road and be less likely to see a kid about to run across the road. IMHO the whole speed arguement is total rubbish, place the responsibility on the driver and punish them severley for their errors and lets stop this nonsense of glueing your eyes to the speedo.

Tiggs

lol...just to cap this off!

i lost my dog yesterday......it took itself for a walk in the feild and some muppet good samaritan caught it and took it dwon the nick! would have been easier if they left the stupid thing to find its way home (as it would have done)

anyway...£25 "fine" from the police for using their kennel (cupboard) for 30 mins....so in the last week i have lost my dog and got done for 36 and its cost me £100.....and i caught the joyriders who got £40.

moral of the story....walk a dog you stole in a car you joyride in...then if you are nicked or loose the dog its cheaper