|
Are you sure it is not possible for cyclists to be done for speeding? Many tractors don't have speedos, for example, yet I'd imagine they are as liable to speeding convictions as anyone else. Not knowing what speed you are doing is not really any defence.
|
Speeding only applies to MOTOR VEHICLES which a Pedal cycle is not.
However you can be drunk in charge of a pedal cycle and also be done for dangerous riding or riding without due care and attention.
DVD
|
what about pony and trap DVD? There's been some change in the legislation IIRC.
Legend has it there used to be one old boy who went to the pub like this on the basis that the horse knew the way home. Anyway he got involved in a pursuit with old bill who nicked him for "furious driving."
Could it be true or a myth do you reckon?
|
|
|
Speeding only applies to MOTOR VEHICLES which a Pedal cycle is not.
Gah! You spotted the flaw in my logic... ;) As an interesting aside, though, what is the situation re these bikes that have a motor fitted to 'assist' the rider?
However you can be drunk in charge of a pedal cycle and also be done for dangerous riding or riding without due care and attention.
Isn't there also an offense of 'furious riding' or something? I'm sure I heard something about someone getting done in the Mersey tunnels for that a few years back, although I could be mis-remembering.
|
To J400ANT and any other interested parties:
The posts of J400ANT (previous Speed thread www.honestjohn.co.uk/forum/post/index.htm?t=10359&...e onwards) intrigued me so much that I have spent the weekend on research which has apparently opened a can of worms.
To understand why it is necessary to look at speeding:
Sect 82 Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984 defines a ?restricted road? as one where there are street lights placed not more than 200 yards apart. Note nothing said about signing it as such.
Sect 81(1) states it is unlawful to drive a motor vehicle on a restricted road at a speed exceeding 30 mph.
Sect 85(5) where a road has such lamps the lack of any traffic sign saying the road is NOT restricted will be evidence that IT IS a restricted road. Also 85(4) states where there are no lamps there MUST be a traffic sign stating what the limit is. Hence your signed 30 zones to cater for any deficiency.
Obviously on wide sections of straight urban roads a 30 limit is not practical and could safely support a higher limit. Hence Local Authority steps in and by an Order ups the limit to 40 mph. This limit by law has to have repeater signs at intervals to take it beyond the realm of a restricted road where there are streetlights.(Direction 11 Part 2 TS & GD 2002)
Speed limits, other than restricted roads, have to be signed and the signs by law comply with the requirements as to size and dimension under Traffic Signs and General Directions 2002.
The 40mph restriction is Diagram 670 and the minimum size under the Regs. is 300mm. That quoted by J500ANT appear to be 150mm.
If a sign is outside the dimensions under the Regs. it appears it is unlawful and therefore should preclude any prosecution for exceeding the 40 limit, but not it seems the 30 mph for the restricted road. This means that motorists reported have been done so for exceeding the wrong limit.
Having been unable to come up with any law that permits a reduction in the size of a 40 sign to below 300mm, I visited the Traffic Management Department of our County Council and posed the same problem to them. They have confirmed that there is no lower dimension of 300mm for the 40 repeater sign.
It therefore looks as if J400ANT has unearthed an illegally signed speed limit. I would suggest that he tactfully draws this matter to the attention of his Local Authority to prevent motorists be prosecuted for exceeding the incorrect limit. Please publish any feed back from them.
DVD
|
DVD,
Ive been too busy today (got my new smart - amen) but will focus my attentions upon it tomorrow.
However im not too sure whether to go to the Highways people, or to enlist the help of the ABD and also go to the local paper with it, or else I can imagine I will be soft soaped into believing that what is there is legal.
I will keep you informed.
Tony
|
News this morning that a car dealer in Scotland has been jailed for five months for driving at 156mph in a BMW M3 on the A90.
He's 27 and has also been banned from driving for four years.
Personally, I find it almost disturbing that someone thought it was okay to drive so far over the limit on a public road.
|
So most Germans are disturbed people then, and I'm mad for many times having driven legally in excess of 150MPH on empty autobahn on my trips to the Czech Republic, and for considerably more than this on a Honda Blackbird?
Sure, if something goes wrong, I'm history, but there's a time and place (to be fair neither of which I know regarding our banned Scottish friend) for taking such a decision sensibly.
|
|
There's a difference between Germany, where it's legal, and here, where it's not. The difference is that in Germany other drivers are aware that they might have someone approaching from behind at double their speed and drive accordingly. Over here, it is not expected and therefore more dangerous. (In fact over here it doesn't seem to occur to many drivers that there is anything at all behind them...but that's another matter)
|
Agreed and who decides when it's safe to do 156mph on a public road ?
Who decides when a tyre blows out, when a patch of black ice is encountered, when another driver is going to appear from nowhere ? Who should be responsible ? The driver of the M3 or the other road users he is putting at risk. In my opinion anyone who feels doing more than twice the legal limit on a major public road is totally irresponsible and the last person who should be empowered to make such a decision about what level of risk is acceptable ! For anyone to say that something is safe because they've done it before and walked away is plain nonsense. Who defines what safe is and who's to
say that everyone accepts or should be exposed to that same level of risk ? When we drive on public roads we do not do so in isolation ! We put our own lives and those of other people at risk. The fact that, for a moment of macho madness or to shave half an hour off a journey, some people are prepared to risk so much and be so inconsiderate is really very sad !
|
|
If someone wants to drive at 156 mph on private land and risk their own lives I really couldn't care less. If however they do it public roads they're putting other peoples lives at serious risk and should be banned for life!
Furthermore, anyone responsible for a fatal accident at those sorts of speeds should be treated by the courts as if they'd committed manslaughter.
|
|
|
I have driven at speeds similar to this on French roads following an Audi S4. We drove past the police and slowed down for junctions, busy sections etc and didn't encounter any problems.
The problem in this country is it is all too conjested to drive at that sort of speed and peoples attitude towards fast driving on motorways is silly. I have on many occasions whilst doing 90mph on the M1 had people pull out on me just to get me to slow down which is very dangerous. 90mph on British roads is plenty fast enough for me, 156mph is just downright stupid.
|
Well, we do not know exactly whereabouts, or what the traffic conditions were - roads up here are not always congested - so we don't know if it was dangerous or not; but an Aberdeen car dealer should have known that parts of the A90 are rotten with cameras and anti-motoring police.
Anyway, it obviously makes some characters happy.
Must update Morpheous.
Cheers,
Tomo
Tomo.
|
Its a question of what you're used to.
I've driven extensively in Germany and although there are some unrestricted sections of the autobahn there are actually many more km's where speed limits are applied and ridgidly enforced (typically 100, 120 or 130kph - 130 is the 'advised limit'). On the unrestricted sections the road surface is kept smooth and free from debris and other drivers are very much accustomed to vehicles approaching at high speeds etc.
A dual carriageway usually has no hard shoulder and may have crossings/turnouts etc. so I think driving at that sort of speed on a UK dual carriageway really does have to be classed as a deeply irresponsible act.
|
|
I take your point about the circumstances Tomo however on my trip up the A90 I noticed that almost all the multitude of cameras were placed at the approaches to junctions. Certainly in places where potential for misjudgement of an approaching vehicle speed would lead to terrible consequences. The higher the impact speed the greater the human and mechanical consequences.
|
|
Off topic from the current thread, but just had an itchy trigger finger on the last post and accidentally clicked twice. In the past would have ended up with two posts, now just get a "You've already posted this message dummkopf!" Cool guys!
|
|
Didn't Top Gear show that at this speed the Gatso doesn't get the second picture? Can we take it that patrol car was following at a 'safe' 156mph to determine the speed?
|
|
Tomo, re "don't know if it was dangerous or not" - Mways excepted, it is hardly arguable that such a speed could be safe, on any road, under any circumstances. re anti-motoring police, I regard the traffic police as damn good public servants, having had to work with them. Apologia for hooliganism and denigration of the law enforcers does you little credit, sir.
|
|
BBC news excerpt: \"Police clocked the vehicle several times and found he was doing 120.6mph in a 40mph zone and 156.7mph on the dual carriageway, which has a speed limit of 70mph.\" The sorry tale: news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/3030327.stm
|
120 in a 40? I work that out into km/h, and it frightens the hell out of me, thinking about OUR 60km/h limit areas ...
Oh, and I see he was already disqualifed ...
There's a word for people like that ... but it is not for a family-oriented forum!
|
|
And he was a disqualified driver, I bet mcBill had been keeping tabs on him for a while, 120mph in a 40? no wonder they sent him down.
|
|
At the start of this thread I thought, uh oh, anti-'speeding' rant again. However the bloke needs psychiatric testing - the 120 in a 40, and whilst disqualified? Gotta laugh or you would cry!
|
|
This will get moved to the "Speeding (mostly excl cameras) VII" thread later.
|
DD, why not put it into "The Silly Thread"?
The speed he was doing qualifies as "silly"... :)
|
It's a good job the car is limited to 155mph. God knows how fast he would have gone if the limiter had been removed!
I know that piece of road and there are T junctions all over the place. It would only have taken a tractor to pull out and he would have been dead!
|
|
|
Personally, I think he got off lightly.
I agree with the sentiments expressed by Nortones2.
As for WZebon's point about hitting a tractor, It would be an appropriate lesson for this speeder except that the poor tractor driver would be an innocent victim.
These speeds may be considered safe & legal elsewhere, so if you think you are a good enough driver to drive safely at those speeds, go and do it those countries. (examples of laws in different countries: You can drink alcohol here but would be risking prison if you did so in Saudi; "acts" you can do in the UK at age 16 are considered illegal in the USA; and so the lsit goes on.)
Obey the laws of your country, or get caught and take the punishment. Unless you support anarchy.
|
On the other hand, theres the argument that 70 on the m-way late at night/in traffic free sunny conditions/whatever is a stupidly low speed (guess which argument I agree with.)
I think the punishment was about right - the shock of prison to make him realise followed by the disqualification which presumably, for him, is a great inconvenience with further consequences than not being able to go places for the hell of it.
|
It turns out they threw in dangerous driving and the lad was disqualified, so it's clear he had pushed his luck - as I think I suggested.
But you can clock at least 150 in perfect safety, certainly for anyone else, given the right time and place.
I shan't give my authority for that statement, for fear one of the nannies on here might try to shop it.
Tomo.
|
Tomo, you absolutely can't clock any speed in perfect safety on a public road. You can't even do it on a track; there are so many variables at play that the statement just doesn't stand up.
Nowt to do with 'nannies', either. It's about using your common.
|
Agreed MO - to those who feel doing speeds like that on public roads ANYWHERE at ANY time is safe (and presumably therefore acceptable) I would ask:
Do you feel that anyone who considers it safe to fit and/or service gas appliances on the basis that they own one and have read the Corgi rule book but don't agree with the law should be allowed to do so at their own discretion or do you feel the rights of those innocent parties who might be blown up or gassed as a result should be paramount ? If yes, would your views be the same if that bloke was your next door neighbour and your kids often stayed there overnight ?
Any answers ?
|
|
|
F.A.O. J500ANT
Anything to report on the 40 mpg signs?
DVD
|
|
|
|
|
|
Steve -
Yes its possible to be done for speeding on a bike. My record is 44.5 in a 30! :D
I was in Halfords relaying the story of how Id been done for no lights (I usually only use the bike to get into town and back of a daytime) and the bloke told me about a friend who had been done. Some legislation relating to horseriders was cited. Basically in Aber we have the Dyfed-Powys headquarters, consequence being a lot of police with very little to do.
|
|
|
|
|
