Pet driving hates to be fined

W

Warbler

At the Start
Joined
Jun 6, 2005
Messages
8,493
Cameron finally gets stuck into the meaty issues facing the country

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-23713732

I have to say, I'm not terribly impressed with the idea of fining people for pushing into the other lane at a roundabout. I can see very easily how a driver can make that mistake (largely because its happened to me loads of times) but if you're on roads you aren't familiar with, and you take up a position in standing traffic that conceals the roads directional arrow markings, it's only as you inch forward that you discover your lane is right hand only. What are you supposed to do?.

Three points is far too severe for a non dangerous act. This smacks of collusion between government and the insurance industry, who can now whack premiums up for non dangerous offences and therefore generate additonal revenues without absorbing the supposed risk that speeding involved

Remember Cameron before he was elected said he was going to reduce all this and even made a few cheap points out of speed cameras etc At a stroke he's introduced a much more penicious raft of offences with no right to appeal it seems.

Personally I'd like to see U-turns put in the same bracket Dave, how about it?
 
So I'm driving my car at 1am in the morning last saturday night after an evening out. I'm stone cold sober and I find myself having to slow down for speed cameras in 30mph areas. Why?

I pay road tax and tax on fuel. If I want to drive without a seatbelt on it is my choice.

This is one of those areas where I'm libertarian. The Government should not be getting involved in this type of area.
 
Don't see how the police can implement it, given that the law doesn't seem to have stopped people driving whilst on the phone [my pet hate, given that people have been killed as a result].
 
moehat said:
Don't see how the police can implement it, given that the law doesn't seem to have stopped people driving whilst on the phone [my pet hate, given that people have been killed as a result].
Click to expand...

The large majority of this new set of offences will go unseen and hence unpunished, as is the case with mobile usage in vehicles (a pet hate of mine too) so one could indeed say they can't be implemented; but their purpose, in my view, is to make drivers aware that they will be breaking the law if choosing to do them: a deterrent, and therefore the number of occurrences overall will decrease

I'm all for it and am not really concerned with pondering whether the fines and endorsements fit the crimes as one life saved is worth a million fs and es

The freedom of the road and courtesy on the road: still freeish but increasingly discourteous
 
All I can say is thank God I don't live in the UK here. We very seldom get stopped here for doing something wrong we get stopped for just having a car............it's called "tea money"

Just a way of getting a bit extra cash for underpaid policemen.

Fines for most things are about 1.20p to 30 quid for more serious offences like drunk driving.

I had a friend in the UK who was a top tier manager with Rentokil. Came to my girlfriends house at new year had 4-5 drinks was home at 1am and went to bed.

Gets up the next morning and takes the family to Asda shopping. Right outside the Police Station in Blantyre a guy ignores a give way sign and smashes right into him.

Guy virtually falls out of the car unable to stand, pissed as a fart.

The police come out breathalyse them both and my friend as sober as a judge is a fraction over their stupid limit.

He gets a stiff fine loses his licence, loses his job and later short of cash loses his house and eventually splits up with his wife.

My pet hate is the apparent inability of the police to know when someone is clearly not drunk but they still stick to the letter of the law.

I haven't lived there for years but I seem to remember reading something about each division's budget depending on fines taken.

If that's true it comes as no surprise they show no leniency in cases like my friends.

Does anyone know if that is the case or not?
 
Euronymous said:
So I'm driving my car at 1am in the morning last saturday night after an evening out. I'm stone cold sober and I find myself having to slow down for speed cameras in 30mph areas. Why?
Click to expand...

Because 30mph is demed to be the maximum speed at which you can drive safely in those areas. There may be other road users (including people walking) at that time. What's more, they might be drunk. Driving at 30mph could save your own life, and lives of others.

I pay road tax and tax on fuel. If I want to drive without a seatbelt on it is my choice.
Click to expand...

No you don't you pay vehicle tax. It should not be your choice to drive without a seatbelt. Apart from the fact that a government should (in my view) be trying to safeguard the safety of its citizens, studies have shown that people driving without seatbelts cause more accidents as those wearting seatbelts. See this paper from the Harvard Law School for interest. The first 2 pages give you what you need to know.

http://www.law.harvard.edu/programs/olin_center/papers/pdf/341.pdf

This is one of those areas where I'm libertarian. The Government should not be getting involved in this type of area.
Click to expand...

I think it should protect its citizens.
 
I find the frequent casual attitude to drunk driving disgusting.

I have got in the car the next morning and supposedly sober and still not been spot on. I think i have driven on edge of limit twice (once a little over). Never ever again. Its bloody madness

As an urban cyclist i am naturally distrustful of fat morons in cars (and i wont say who the worst bunch are). As an aside its actually worse outside of London than in.

I would also drop the limit to equivalent of one pint not two.

Once caught over the limit? Im actually one that thinks that many sentences for some misdemeanors in life are excessive but in this case? Easy. A life ban and that's that. And fck your job and kids swimming lessons or whatever

Its not extreme. Its the same to me as walking down the street firing off a gun randomly
 
Last edited:
Well said. Just because people have a perception of competency (maybe accurate, maybe misplaced) doesn't mean they should be allowed to flaunt the law.

Like Clive, I have been over the limit the morning after twice, and I won't do it again. I don't drive so well when I am like that.
 
Surely there's two things going on here?

Speed, drink driving, and mobile phone use = dangers and punishment etc

Then we've got things like pushing into the end bit of a queue in roadworks, changing lane at a roundabout, and even following too closely can be unavoidable on a heavily congested road if someone cuts in on you, and 5 secs later plod comes past and deduces you're tailgating

The idea that all of these offences are about safety clearly isn't born out at all. It strikes me there's a few things going on

1: Money generation. I doubt very much it will be a case of the occasional opportunist nicking. What I suspect we'll also see is the authorised body lying in wait at known traffic roundabouts where stationary traffic can hide directional arrows on the carriageway pulling people over as and when they transgress

2: A junior minister anxious to introduce a policy initiative with his name on it. It actually has all the hallmarks of a motorists survey of annoying traits which has been dug up and turned into a populist policy for someone to hang their coat on whilst they try and attempt to shimmy up the greasy parliamentary pole. The problem with these types of populist policies is that they quickly start to lose popularity

3: The insurance industry know that they can inflate a premium once they can get endorsements on a license (don't they Clive?) So imagine their delight at being able to whack you with a £200 for commiting a non-dangerous act. The risk to them actually doesn't alter, but do any of us think for one second they'll ignore 6 pts for pushing into a left lane, when you discovered that the right hand lane is right hand turn only about 50yds from a roundabout

That reminds me Clive. I seem to recall that at the height of Gatsco cam scam we did a survey amongst members and me and you were leading the field in the heavy right foot department, are we to deduce that your conversion to the bicycle is the result of pushing over the twelve?
 
I was up to 9 points at one time. How you remember that I dont know. Im down to three now

I havent converted to a bike for that reason but it just makes more sense on so many different levels. Never felt so fit too

Cars bore me silly though. Never watched Top Gear ever, F1 is for those who's lips move when they read and for a whole year i didnt even know how to open the bonnet of the Saab. When i fill the tank up its lasts two months
 
Last edited:
Back
Top