How quick can camera vans "get" you...?!
Comments
-
Slight difference there..... I can't be arrested for making a grammatical error on a forum as it's not illegal.0
-
guilliano wrote:Maybe because that's a likely place for an offence (speeding) to be commited? Or is it OK to brake the law if you personally feel there is no need to obey it in a particular place? The police will look to catch people breaking the law where it is most likely to happen.
Hear, hear.
Break the law and get away with it. That's OK? Break the law and get caught. That's unfair?
I fail to understand the logic of that. The law is there to be obeyed. Break it and be prepared to suffer the consequences. Regardless of the offence and how much you might dislike it.
If you do not like a law, any law, you have no right to break it as you feel so inclined. If you don't like a law, because it is unjust, campaign to have it changed.There's no such thing as too old.0 -
You are talking about motor bikes or something because you all act as if 75-80 mph is just cruising speed?0
-
As one of the first posts correctly said if you dont recieve anything in about 3 weeks (postal strike?) then you will be fine its all downloaded electronically so its a speedy (sorry) system.
Does grate me though....if you do the crime then do the time......
Wost happens you get another fixer for moby use or a due care on top of this one and you will get loads of training miles (on the bike ) anyway....
Anyway you always get 10% so 60mph =66 etc 30mph =33.... to allow for speedo error etc....
Wheres that postie????0 -
guilliano wrote:Slight difference there..... I can't be arrested for making a grammatical error on a forum as it's not illegal.
Well you should be because your grasp of the English language is quite literally criminal.
Some very law abiding members of society on here. A true example to all us career criminals. :roll:0 -
Surf-Matt wrote:guilliano wrote:Slight difference there..... I can't be arrested for making a grammatical error on a forum as it's not illegal.
Well you should be because your grasp of the English language is quite literally criminal.
it cannot be 'literally' criminal - because as gulliano says, there is no criminal law governing spelling on internet forums...
Perhaps incorrect use of the word 'literally' should also be made illegal..??0 -
Nah, it's practically compulsory on most internet forums (or should that be fora?)softlad wrote:Perhaps incorrect use of the word 'literally' should also be made illegal..??
Which makes me think, it can't be long before someone gets compared to the Nazis...0 -
Too fast "dood", hope you got got. Might make you think twice next time before breaking the speed limit.0
-
softlad wrote:Surf-Matt wrote:guilliano wrote:Slight difference there..... I can't be arrested for making a grammatical error on a forum as it's not illegal.
Well you should be because your grasp of the English language is quite literally criminal.
it cannot be 'literally' criminal - because as gulliano says, there is no criminal law governing spelling on internet forums...
Perhaps incorrect use of the word 'literally' should also be made illegal..??
Oh do button it. What is wrong with you? You seem to love picking up on all my threads. I have found the same with many fellow PR "professionals." Oh well, things are going well for us - maybe not for you? That's my guess. Now get a life and move on.
Andy - well thanks for that. What a bunch of angels we have on here. :roll: In fact I have never seen such a concentration of wierdos. I'll leave you all to your ultra pedantic, whiter than white lives. Strange how mountain bikers seem so much more laid back and infinitely less uptight. Oh well, I guess wearing lycra does funny things to a man. Bye.0 -
So just to be clear, the general attitude is speeding is bad and Matt is a very naughty boy for speeding (albeit on a very safe road)
I find the attitudes on here a bit weird to be honest, Matt may or may not have got caught and explained the situation it occurred and made an opinion on the camera vans placement and everyone jumps up and down on him.
Yes speed limits are laws and they are supposed to be in place for safety reasons, to protect people can we agree in that atleast?
So how come there are numerous threads from roadies that happily point out that speed limits dont apply to bikes and I try to do xx in a 30/20 limit etc etc.
Given that we are told speed limits are in place for safety reasons why do so many roadies think its fine to exceed them? OK so not against the law but surely against the spirit of it?0 -
Surf-Matt wrote:Oh do button it. What is wrong with you? You seem to love picking up on all my threads. I have found the same with many fellow PR "professionals."
So, I pick you up on your use of grammar (after you have done the same to someone else) and you don't like it...? Your comments have come back and bitten you on the ar5e, that's all.....Surf-Matt wrote:Oh well, things are going well for us - maybe not for you? That's my guess.
Pride comes before a fall, fella....Surf-Matt wrote:Strange how mountain bikers seem so much more laid back and infinitely less uptight. Oh well, I guess wearing lycra does funny things to a man. Bye.
Matt - I've just had the 'early 1990s' on the phone - they want their thread back......0 -
I got "flashed" recently. There is a wide road with marked parking bays, then a fairly wide cycle lane, then the car lane. I went past an unmarked dark blue van parked in a bay just as a car was speeding up the road. I was only a couple of foot from the side of the van when a blinding red light flash went off from behind a darkened window right next to my head, I nearly fell off I jumped so much. One lucky guy in a hot hatch though, as the police will have a photo of my ear.0
-
glamrox wrote:So just to be clear, the general attitude is speeding is bad and Matt is a very naughty boy for speeding (albeit on a very safe road)
I find the attitudes on here a bit weird to be honest, Matt may or may not have got caught and explained the situation it occurred and made an opinion on the camera vans placement and everyone jumps up and down on him.
Yes speed limits are laws and they are supposed to be in place for safety reasons, to protect people can we agree in that atleast?
So how come there are numerous threads from roadies that happily point out that speed limits dont apply to bikes and I try to do xx in a 30/20 limit etc etc.
Given that we are told speed limits are in place for safety reasons why do so many roadies think its fine to exceed them? OK so not against the law but surely against the spirit of it?
Cycling mainly on country roads, this isn't really something that applies to me, but if a cyclist is doing 40mph in a 30mph zone, they are putting themselves most at risk.
A car doing 40 in a 30 zone is mainly putting other people at risk.0 -
To the people who are acting righteous, EVERY person who drives will break the speed limit every day, that is a fact, you might be going down a hill that is a 30mph limit and find yourself doing 31, speeding. If you say, 'I dont' you are lying. I speed every day, i sit at 75-80 on my motorway drive to work and i often find myself going over the 30mph road limit into work as i am just following the traffic and everyone else is doing the same speed, I am not saying this is ok, if i get caught then i deserve it, i am just saying that everyone speeds by a little or a lot.Full Susser - GT I-Drive XCR 5
Hardtail - GT Aggressor XC 2
Road Bike - GT GTR Series 40 -
Surf-Matt wrote:Andy - well thanks for that. What a bunch of angels we have on here. :roll: In fact I have never seen such a concentration of wierdos. I'll leave you all to your ultra pedantic, whiter than white lives. Strange how mountain bikers seem so much more laid back and infinitely less uptight. Oh well, I guess wearing lycra does funny things to a man. Bye.
Matt - bit of advice. In a country where road cycling is made a hell of a lot less pleasant than it should be by drivers, the best place to come and discuss whether you will get a speeding ticket or not probably isn't a road cycling forum.
Anyway you seem to have accepted that you would deserve the fine and points, so fair-dos.0 -
Except for the driver who sat at 50.5mph overtaking a lorry doing 50 for half the distance along the A90 today...Big Shoes wrote:EVERY person who drives will break the speed limit every day0 -
Surf-Matt wrote:softlad wrote:Surf-Matt wrote:guilliano wrote:Slight difference there..... I can't be arrested for making a grammatical error on a forum as it's not illegal.
Well you should be because your grasp of the English language is quite literally criminal.
it cannot be 'literally' criminal - because as gulliano says, there is no criminal law governing spelling on internet forums...
Perhaps incorrect use of the word 'literally' should also be made illegal..??
Oh do button it. What is wrong with you? You seem to love picking up on all my threads. I have found the same with many fellow PR "professionals." Oh well, things are going well for us - maybe not for you? That's my guess. Now get a life and move on.
Andy - well thanks for that. What a bunch of angels we have on here. :roll: In fact I have never seen such a concentration of wierdos. I'll leave you all to your ultra pedantic, whiter than white lives. Strange how mountain bikers seem so much more laid back and infinitely less uptight. Oh well, I guess wearing lycra does funny things to a man. Bye.
What a looser!0 -
I would be quite interested to see a comparison of injuries from a ped being hit by a car at 40 and hit by a bike at 40. Cars are designed to help minimise damage to peds in a crash, bikes aren't. I don't think you can say a cyclist is only putting themselves at risk.0
-
glamrox wrote:I would be quite interested to see a comparison of injuries from a ped being hit by a car at 40 and hit by a bike at 40. Cars are designed to help minimise damage to peds in a crash, bikes aren't. I don't think you can say a cyclist is only putting themselves at risk.
It wouldn't be pretty, believe me. I've been to many an accident scene where a pedestrian has been hit at around 40.
It is really quite unpleasant and nothing on the front of a car is going to make it any less disastrous. The only difference is there is less chance of something impaling you/cutting you in half these days so at least the family get to see the body in one piece...
I'm pretty sure it wouldn't be nice if a bike hit you at 40 either...0 -
glamrox wrote:I would be quite interested to see a comparison of injuries from a ped being hit by a car at 40 and hit by a bike at 40. Cars are designed to help minimise damage to peds in a crash, bikes aren't. I don't think you can say a cyclist is only putting themselves at risk.
You are joking right?TT photos http://www.flickr.com/photos/steverob/0 -
Surf-Matt, thought you surfers were meant to be all laid back and stuff. Don't you realise that we are all mental for riding light bikes at speed on cack roads?
Go back to the other forum and blub like a baby there. I speed, I take chances and am no angel and am very happy with that. Plus your bike is pants. :P0 -
You could just try obeying the SPEED LIMIT it folks like you that get cyclists KILLLED!0
-
I had a clean licence until I moved to Wales - then I got six points within the first two years. One from a camera van which clocked me at 83 on the A48 near Carmarthen and another from a handheld for doing around 55 on a country B road with a 40 limit. Both were 'fair cops', as they say....
It didn't teach me not to 'speed' - because I still do, up to a point. Anyone who says they don't is a liar. But I am much more aware of my surroundings now. I used to own a reasonably fast motor and sometimes I would drive it like a fkin lunatic. These days, I am diesel powered...0 -
Airwave wrote:glamrox wrote:I would be quite interested to see a comparison of injuries from a ped being hit by a car at 40 and hit by a bike at 40. Cars are designed to help minimise damage to peds in a crash, bikes aren't. I don't think you can say a cyclist is only putting themselves at risk.
You are joking right?
Perhaps I haven't had enough coffee yet this morning but what do you think I am joking about?0 -
Sooo you think it would be safer to be hit by at least a tonne of metal doing 40 - rather than some scrawny bloke on a bike doing 40 ??
If it was one or the other - I know what I would choose.
I've got no complaints about speed cameras - the more the merrier. The roads are full of idiots who use inappropriate speeds and even those who happily carry on driving at speed when they cant see due to low sun. One of those killed my pal.
And the woman driver I saw in the outside lane on the M6 on Sunday afternoon - texting as she was driving at around 60/70 ?? In built up traffic ? She should be jailed.0 -
cougie wrote:Sooo you think it would be safer to be hit by at least a tonne of metal doing 40 - rather than some scrawny bloke on a bike doing 40 ??
If it was one or the other - I know what I would choose.
Did you actually read my post? Where did I ever say getting hit by a car would be safer? I made comment that cars have a level of protection for pedestrians built in opposed to bikes that do not. Getting hit by anything at 40 is gonna be bad, I am intrigued to know if people at the TRL have done comparisons between cars and bikes to the likely levels of injury to a ped.
My point is that if people believe that speeding is bad and dangerous why is it ok to speed on a bike?0 -
Yes I did read your post.
Isnt it Renault that lead the way in pedestrian safety ? I'd reckon that >90% of all cars on the roads have bugger all pedestrian safety and the sheer mass of the car would easily make that the worse option.
I cant actually think that I've broken the speed limit on a bike more than a handful of times - its pretty hard to do.0 -
Let's think about this slightly differently.
Around here every school has a permanent 20mph speed limit outside of them, I cycle through one every day on the way to work and again on the way home. Clearly the 20mph limit is in place to provide safety to kids going/leaving the school ( you do have to ask why it's 24hours and not "peak school times" but that is another discussion
)
Let us now imagine two scenarios
1.) cyclist is coming down the road at 25mph kids steps out, hit by bike
2.) car is coming down the road at 25mph kids steps out, hit by car
Thinking of speed limits as a safety device is the cyclist any better than the car driver?0 -
I don't condone speeding by any means of transport (I get really annoyed when people complain about getting speeding fines seeing as it was them driving so deserve everything they get for being over the limit which is there for a reason), but surely the important factor when comparing speeding cars with speeding bikes is the stopping distance?! I wouldn't know what these are for either means of transport but in my mind it seems the more logical thing to think about.0
-
glamrox wrote:Let's think about this slightly differently.
Around here every school has a permanent 20mph speed limit outside of them, I cycle through one every day on the way to work and again on the way home. Clearly the 20mph limit is in place to provide safety to kids going/leaving the school ( you do have to ask why it's 24hours and not "peak school times" but that is another discussion )
Let us now imagine two scenarios
1.) cyclist is coming down the road at 25mph kids steps out, hit by bike
2.) car is coming down the road at 25mph kids steps out, hit by car
Thinking of speed limits as a safety device is the cyclist any better than the car driver?
The question I want answering is why when I am doing 25mph in a 20mile area past a school, cars still pass me?0
