I lifted some of this post from another forum, but in essence it is something that I have witnessed on this forum where I am amazed by the number of contributors who justify breaking the law when it concerns driving, but get really uppity when a “toerag” tries to steal their car. It seems a strange state of affairs on a forum where the mods are pretty scared of libel and will nuke a post for safety.

 

• Speed cameras = evil machines that catch innocent people exceeding the speed limit.

• Unmarked Police Cars = shouldn’t be allowed because they can catch people breaking speed limits.

• Speed limits = ridiculous attempts to stop people who get up late getting to work on time.

• Double Yellow lines = How dare someone tell us we cannot park in such a way as to create a danger.

• Use of Mobiles whilst Driving = the nanny state stopping me from doing something which is now considered essential.

• Eating whilst driving = petty attempt by police to alienate the whole of society.

 

For goodness sake get real..........the law is there, if you break, it you get fined or worse. If you don't like it contact someone who can action change, but don't keep bleating on, on here about how some poor innocent got caught, and how it is victimisation etc etc.

 

Abuse of Highway Laws is now so regular that it seems the only time they are obeyed is whilst we are learning to drive!! If the police stopped every offender there would hardly be a car moving on the roads.

 

Now I'm no good guy in this aspect either, I certainly don't always stick to 70 mph or the posted speed limit on the road either - but I accept that in breaking the law, I am taking a risk and if caught am willing to accept the penalty, it sometimes seems on here that it is possible to pick and choose which law of the land they shall obey.

the people the moan about speed camera's etc have just as much right to that on here as you have to post that drivel ;) (which i have just as much right to say :D)

i thought you sold your zed?

 

go away

no, ive still got it! :rofl:

not you mr c :D i was talking to your partner mr D

 

CD

 

i see a blatant pattern

In fact what you say is correct, the law of the land is there to be obeyed, to break it is to invite punishment.

 

However, and this is where reality comes to stay, to say that someone eating a kit kat whilst driving a car is the same sort of low life scum who would steal a persons pride and joy for no other purpose than a 20 min joy ride round the local housing estate and a Gti barbecue with his mates is taking the "ideal" a little too far.

 

If the fact was that you break the law = you get punished fair enough, but that is blatantly not the case, in fact it seems to be that if you break the law and hang around a bit , in daylight, without any form of moral support then you will get jumped upon from a great height, or you can register your car in your name, tax it, insure it and get the same result. Otherwise, you pretty much get off.

Sorry Mike - Does being Zedless mean I cannot post or surf here anymore?

in my opinion speed cameras are there for a reason, to reduce speed. Wether they make money or not. If you break speed limit i.e the law then you are getting punished. The people who complain are the ones who speed. Dont speed, dont complain. However i agree with people getting caught with eating a kitkat, this is stupid. If this is the case then all smokers should be banned from smoking behind the wheel. And police banned from using their radios in there cars.

in my opinion speed cameras are there for a reason, to reduce speed. Wether they make money or not. If you break speed limit i.e the law then you are getting punished. The people who complain are the ones who speed. Dont speed, dont complain. However i agree with people getting caught with eating a kitkat, this is stupid. If this is the case then all smokers should be banned from smoking behind the wheel. And police banned from using their radios in there cars.

 

 

LOL!! so why did that poor old bloke get prosecuted last week for putting a sign up warning of a speed camera??? everyone saw the sign & slowed down - surely thats what the law wants???

no, they were pissed cos they had no revenue from that camera on that day!!

 

speed camera's are a form of revenue. if you get "caught" on camera, they prosecute on the basis of a piccie of a car, that may or may not be yours, which you may or may not have been driving. they then sent you a notice asking you to admit to this crime & pay up!! LMAO!! :rolleyes:

LOL!! so why did that poor old bloke get prosecuted last week for putting a sign up warning of a speed camera??? everyone saw the sign & slowed down - surely thats what the law wants???

no, they were pissed cos they had no revenue from that camera on that day!!

 

speed camera's are a form of revenue. if you get "caught" on camera, they prosecute on the basis of a piccie of a car, that may or may not be yours, which you may or may not have been driving. they then sent you a notice asking you to admit to this crime & pay up!! LMAO!! :rolleyes:

 

yeah but it comes down to dont speed and there is no problem.

LOL!! dont eat kitkats & drive either then :p

 

in fact, why even allow cars that go over 70mph to be sold in this country??

 

just because we have archaic laws in this country, doesnt mean we all have to agree with them.

What problem I have with speed camera is the police think that is all you need.

 

They dont stop drink driving and they wont take pictures of drunken drivers. They dont take pictures of people who dont indicate, cut people up, drive in the middle of the road, pull out when they shouldn't, drive at a dangerous distance to the car infront, drive without tax or insurance to name just a very small amount of other driving offences which virtually all I would deem more dangerous than speeding.

 

But because there are no cameras to stop that the police are not interested.

 

15 years ago traffic police would drive round catching speeders, catching people driving irratically, swerveing dangoursly across lanes on a motorway, driving inches away from the car in front, not indicating and driving drunk, to name just a few very serious offences. Now traffic poilce sit on motorway bridges with a radar gun.

 

If there as a poilce car with a radar gun on a motorway bridge, as long as I keep to the limit, I could swerve across all 3 lanes and drive down the hard shoulder and nothing would happen. I could pull into the middle lane without indicating when a car is coming and nothing would happen. There is only purpose for that traffic police officer, and that is to catch people speeding.

 

Speeding also helps to keep the crimes prosicuted percentage up. Every one person who is caught speeding and sent a ticket, it is classed as a 100% success. 1 person found speeding and is prosicuted.

 

A person who gets beat up in a pub and they never find the person does not help their statistics as it will go as an unsolved crime.

 

Now police HAVE TO have a solved crime percentage of so much otherwise people will lose thier jobs. So what you do is put 1 officer trying to solve 5-6 violent crimes which hardly get a conviction and then put all remaining officers behind speed cameras to meet their targets.

 

I dont mind if I was caught speeding, but as long as the percentage of people driving like tits get convicted do too. But they dont. Speeding is the only car crime they want.

Can't make you wrong there Stuart. A speed camera is a potent device for the "fight" against speedsters but pretty crap at drink drivers or, drivers who need to be reined in a little 'cause their antics are idiotic.

yeah but it comes down to dont speed and there is no problem.

 

BTW, dunno if you read the 1st part of my post you quoted, but the drivers didnt speed & there was a problem. the bloke who stopped them speeding got prosecuted!! :rolleyes:

yeah but it comes down to dont speed and there is no problem.

 

And you drive a Z???

Get real man, ppl being prosicuted in there thousands every day for the offence of excess speed while driving safely is a total fookin money spinning racket. Nothing less.

As Srrae says its also not helping road safety AT ALL.

And yes they're gonna ban smoking behind the wheel soon too, unless Labour get kicked out on their fat arses next year.

I dont want to get into the politics on this one and I'm not one to moan, all I can say is you gotta outsmart the fookers. When you're on home ground- you know the cameras, you know where the coppers are in wait, so drive hard then break! When you're out of town, go easier and follow your hunch. In Reading they had a camera setup in a van and it was highly publicised, even got a mention in The Sun (something about the most money making camera in the country). The thing is it was only used on two stretches of road, yet still loads got done by it including my mate twice- a new (scooby) driver not been on the road two years so he has to re-take his test. Dappy plonka I say :slap:

 

So be like me (clean license, never been caught speeding (touch wood)) and follow your hunch and have the luck of the gods- you can be a boy racer and get away with it- ha ha :hyper:

:duffer: :dance: :duffer:

If they put the same time & money investment in to paedophilia or rape or burglary there would be massive reductions in these crimes, reason they dont? no financial return. pure and simple.

 

laws are one thing. but draconian measures designed to steal money from overall law abiding people are more than I can stomach.

 

Parking - more double yellow lines, means less parking space for more cars, means more fines & more yellow lines and more high premium parking lots, who coincidentally run the private parking attendants. work it out einstein.

 

speeding I'm all for anti-speeding measures where appropriate, near schools, accident blackspots & so on. is this the case? no! they are mostly situated on streches of road that have speed limits below a comfortable speed, in relation to the traffic flow. or in areas where the highest amount of revenue can be gained. i.e. explain why there is a speed camera on a remote straight road (A40 oxford) almost behind a road sign. and no speed camera on a 30 zone in Swindon where a child was killed the other day, and is a major accident blackspot. Reason? in built up areas people are generally a bit more sensible (not all) and whilst slowing the traffic down, as they should do. they would not generate half the amount of revenue. you see a pattern forming?

 

Contrary to popular belief, most unmarked cars generally dont stop people solely for speeding, but if they are driving dangerously.

 

use of mobile phones with no headset is just stupid if you're driving. but even more foolish are the people who find the necessity to turn away from the road in front to look at the passengers they are talking to. they should police that crap.

 

Eating while driving. Agreed to a certain extent if it's affecting their driving, but a packet of crisps between the legs hurt no one. Smoking on the other hand.. :rolleyes: how many drivers have you seen drop the end or the whole cigarette whilst driving and then proceded to swerve all over the fekn place trying to pat out the glowing red bit?

 

And as for post nuking. This is an open forum for debate & opinion, the mods should know that opinion is not libellous. read any computer games review mag, to see this in operation.

you cant blame the goverment for stupid prosections like the nursery nurse getting done for eating an apple, each police force answers to the council, or the governing police department, and not all councils are labour, far from it

 

lol drive a z and not exceed some speed limits, a bit like buying an all singing and dancing computer and running it in 16 colours, the original post in this thread is a bit like that advert "i don't do politics"

 

so if your tyre bursts dont post, its your own fault,

if your engine blows up dont post, its your own fault

if your likely to do anything that has a consequence DONT POST :rolleyes:

And you drive a Z???

Get real man, ppl being prosicuted in there thousands every day for the offence of excess speed while driving safely is a total fookin money spinning racket. Nothing less.

As Srrae says its also not helping road safety AT ALL.

And yes they're gonna ban smoking behind the wheel soon too, unless Labour get kicked out on their fat arses next year.

 

never said i didn't speed, just thats my line of thought. And you dont need to speed in the Z, 0-60 feels good, its overtaking on motorways, not topend driving. When was the last time you drove 172 on the motorway

And you drive a Z???

Get real man, ppl being prosicuted in there thousands every day for the offence of excess speed while driving safely is a total fookin money spinning racket. Nothing less.

As Srrae says its also not helping road safety AT ALL.

And yes they're gonna ban smoking behind the wheel soon too, unless Labour get kicked out on their fat arses next year.

 

 

I can't see them banning smoking behind the wheel. Think about how much revenue they'd loose from taxation of cigs. I smoke pretty much everytime I get into the Zed- especially when waiting in traffic! This would mean I'd smoke 4 cigs less per day.

never said i didn't speed, just thats my line of thought. And you dont need to speed in the Z, 0-60 feels good, its overtaking on motorways, not topend driving. When was the last time you drove 172 on the motorway

 

I wanna find out what 172 feels like.... must get that speed restricter sorted :hyper: :rofl:

I can't see them banning smoking behind the wheel. Think about how much revenue they'd loose from taxation of cigs. I smoke pretty much everytime I get into the Zed- especially when waiting in traffic! This would mean I'd smoke 4 cigs less per day.

 

 

I know what you're saying but.. they will!!

The loss in cigarette tax will be more than compensated for with the new FPN fine for 'smoking without due care and attention' !

I know what you're saying but.. they will!!

The loss in cigarette tax will be more than compensated for with the new FPN fine for 'smoking without due care and attention' !

 

 

Not quite because after a few hundred people have been fined for smoking whilst driving, the word will spread and no one else will do so. Therefore, fines for smoking will cease- no more revenue! They're not stupid.

 

Who knows. If people can stop smoking whilst driving, they might just be able to break the habit. This would be the governments nightmare- not enough smokers. :xxx: .

off topic

 

banning smoking in one day will not solve problems, the NHS will be left with the burden of smokers for the next 40 years, it has to be phased out over a period of time.

Mike, the NHS, I feel, are more burdened by other problems ie too many middle management drainage resources resulting in less money for nurses and doctors. To compensate for this, they are trying to train nurses to take on some tasks which previously doctors carried out.

 

Besides, the average smoker may die a little younger than non smokers (assuming they didn't smoke 24/7). Say 65/70. This would mean less money paid out for pensions allowing them to literally make a killing (this is just pure assumption here).

 

If we want to lighten the burden on the NHS we might as well ban alcohol! Think how many accidents, injuries, deaths etc have been caused by alcohol which the NHS have and will continue to heal.

 

It's all down to supply and demand.