Why is it that, according to you, we should always put the rights of the victims above the rights of the law-breaker, except on this particular issue where you just happen to be the lawbreaker?

 

It is a technical law, a law that most people break, bit like downloading music off Limewire etc

 

It does not compare with burglary, mugging, child molestation, rape and so on which the average citizen would be far more concerned about than someone going over the speed limit on a motorway.

It is a technical law, a law that most people break, bit like downloading music off Limewire etc

 

It does not compare with burglary, mugging, child molestation, rape and so on which the average citizen would be far more concerned about than someone going over the speed limit on a motorway.

...or over the speed limit somewhere else and running someone down and killing them.

...or over the speed limit somewhere else and running someone down and killing them.

 

I never speed in areas where there are pedestrians (schools, High Streets, residential areas), anyone wants to cross a motorway or dual carriageway (the places I speed) then frankly they are a fukkin idiot and deserve to be run over.

I never speed in areas where there are pedestrians (schools, High Streets, residential areas), anyone wants to cross a motorway or dual carriageway (the places I speed) then frankly they are a fukkin idiot and deserve to be run over.

Yeah, but have you ever heard of multi-car pile-ups on a motorway/dual carriageway? :rolleyes:

Yeah, but have you ever heard of multi-car pile-ups on a motorway/dual carriageway? :rolleyes:

 

Again in that situation I would not speed, I have a traffic alert thing on my in car stereo that interrupts my music with any accident alerts so I would not speed approaching a pile up

 

If a pile up happened just ahead of me - A) The weather would either be bad or B) The traffic would be quite heavy in which case I would not be speeding in situation A or B in the first place.

Again in that situation I would not speed, I have a traffic alert thing on my in car stereo that interrupts my music with any accident alerts so I would not speed approaching a pile up

 

If a pile up happened just ahead of me - A) The weather would either be bad or B) The traffic would be quite heavy in which case I would not be speeding in situation A or B in the first place.

That's you though. Others clearly aren't quite so sensible.

I don't have a death wish Tyron :) I don't take stupid or unnecessary risks

 

You would be far safer being a passenger in my car than you would 95% of cars in this country tbh

It is a technical law, a law that most people break, bit like downloading music off Limewire etc

 

It does not compare with burglary, mugging, child molestation, rape and so on which the average citizen would be far more concerned about than someone going over the speed limit on a motorway.

What is a "technical law"? There is no such thing in English and Welsh law. As I've already said, the law is the law whether you like it or not.

I don't have a death wish Tyron :) I don't take stupid or unnecessary risks

 

You would be far safer being a passenger in my car than you would 95% of cars in this country tbh

Unfortunately that's what most drivers think. An overwhelming majority of drivers think they are "above average". By definition, a lot of them are wrong.

What is a "technical law"? There is no such thing in English and Welsh law. As I've already said, the law is the law whether you like it or not.

 

Some laws are more morally acceptable than others

 

Going over the speed limit on a deserted motorway in good weather or downloading the odd song on Limewire are both technically crimes but ones the public would place very very low on the list of priorities in which the crime is important. I believe it is an offence to draw a moustache on the Queen's face on a banknote but come on that hardly ranks with murder, rape, mugging etc

Unfortunately that's what most drivers think. An overwhelming majority of drivers think they are "above average". By definition, a lot of them are wrong.

 

I have the record to back it up though :

 

9 years protected no claims bonus

 

Training from a Mercedes test driver

 

Never once driven after even 1 glass of alcohol

 

Drive BELOW the speed limit in high risk areas

 

 

I have the record to back it up though :

 

9 years protected no claims bonus

 

Training from a Mercedes test driver

 

Never once driven after even 1 glass of alcohol

 

Drive BELOW the speed limit in high risk areas

And several speeding offences.

Some laws are more morally acceptable than others

 

Going over the speed limit on a deserted motorway in good weather or downloading the odd song on Limewire are both technically crimes but ones the public would place very very low on the list of priorities in which the crime is important. I believe it is an offence to draw a moustache on the Queen's face on a banknote but come on that hardly ranks with murder, rape, mugging etc

That's hardly a fair comparison. Nobody dies because of illegal downloading. I would class the odd illegal download as a trivial offence unworthy of any police time. I would say the same about most cases of going at 75 in a 70-limit zone or 80 on a motorway. OTOH, driving at over 100 is far more serious as is downloading hundreds of songs.

And several speeding offences.

 

All marginally over the permitted speed +10% +2 MPH rule

 

47 in a 40

48 in a 40

71 in a 60

36 in a 30

 

In 2 cases it was 1mph over the threshold, in 1 case it was 2mph over the threshold, in 1 case it was 3mph over the threshold

 

3 of them were after midnight

 

Common sense police would have booked me for none of them