[Closed] Speed Camera flashed on the M6 - 74mph in a 50mph Variable Speed Limit zone

I did a speed awareness course after being camera-vanned doing 61 in a 50 (bang to rights - I was overtaking a caravan at the last point before 10 miles of twisty road)

The North Yorkshire course guys said the upper limit for being offered the course was 64 in a 50. May be different for smart motorways but maybe not.

But you’d think those same people who only ever see normal signs showing speed limits might be less inclined to think they’re just some sort of decoration to be ignored because they don’t have the experience to think there are things like advisory limits, which you only see on motorways or big A roads.

I’d fall into this category..no idea what a smart motorway even is! Do we have them in Scotland? just assumed when I see a number flash above a motorway then that’s the limit that is mandatory

As an aside however, 2 weeks wages before tax seems pretty harsh for speeding on a motorway. I’d probably get less of a fine for assaulting someone which seems ridiculous

I’d fall into this category..no idea what a smart motorway even is! Do we have them in Scotland? just assumed when I see a number flash above a motorway then that’s the limit that is mandatory

Yeah, that's the thing for me. If you don't know, you should be on the side of caution.

£57k is a good salary by most people’s standards. Around double the average.

Indeed, a gross salary of £57k is borderline top 10% of UK earners.

Especially when it's just from failing to react to a variable speed limit in time.

Getting fined for doing 80MPH + on a motorway is understandable, it is clearly deliberate

But not reacting to a variable speed limit in time, when the motorway looks clear as far as I could see, it's just a mistake.

£100 would be reasonable, but one or two weeks salary is atrocious

As an aside however, 2 weeks wages before tax seems pretty harsh for speeding on a motorway. I’d probably get less of a fine for assaulting someone which seems ridiculous

It's about the potential to do harm. Most motorway speeding (and other bad driving) goes by without causing more than passive aggressive tutting but when there are accidents on Motorways fatalities are common.

But not reacting to a variable speed limit in time, when the motorway looks clear as far as I could see, it’s just a mistake.

You've got at least a full minute (more than a mile at 74mph), how much time do you need?

No it was just a mistake. I never knew much about Smart Motorways until now, and never realised that the reduced speeds were so mandatory. I never thought they were any more serious than the advisory limits.

And what made you happy to roll past what you thought was an advisory 50 at an indicated 74, amongst traffic that presumably wasn't getting flashed?

Is it definitely a multiple of gross weekly income?

That would seem a little harsh to higher earners, as it's a higher percentage of take home pay (i.e. it's more weeks of actual take home pay for a higher rate taxpayer than for a lower rate taxpayer).

If you earn 57k damn right it should be more than £100. How the hell would that be fair. Your on triple my and many others salary so how would it be any kind of incentive for you to slow down if it's less than a singular days wages

Getting fined for doing 80MPH + on a motorway is understandable, it is clearly deliberate

I did 90+ by accident, in my old Peugeot standard procedure was to enter a slip road in third, floor it, up to fourth, floor it again and maybe stand half a chance of being up to speed when joining the carriageway. Same procedure in a borrowed MG ZT leads to much more speed being gained much more quickly.
.

Getting fined for doing 80MPH + on a motorway is understandable, it is clearly deliberate

But not reacting to a variable speed limit in time, when the motorway looks clear as far as I could see, it’s just a mistake.

So going 10mph over the limit deserves penalising, but doing 20mph over the limit is just a mistake??!!

You do know what this means don't you?
The more you post on this subject the more I think that taking your licence away for a while might be a good idea.

That would seem a little harsh to higher earners, as it’s a higher percentage of take home pay (i.e. it’s more weeks of actual take home pay for a higher rate taxpayer than for a lower rate taxpayer)

That's the idea... it's supposed to be harsh.

But not reacting to a variable speed limit in time, when the motorway looks clear as far as I could see, it’s just a mistake.

A) if its clear its nearly as safe to weigh anchor as it is to be speeding past.
B) if you could see the road was clear you've got plenty of visibility of the gantry before you get there.
C) the cameras are not keyed to the speed on the same gantry, rather to the previous one at the time you should have passed it - so not less than 75 seconds based on a 50mph limit on a gantry spacing of 1mi. If that previous gantry switched at the moment you passed it, you've 75 seconds to clear the next gantry before the camera drops to 50. Given you were doing in excess of 70 you'd have been at least half a mile past the camera by the time it changed to enforcing 50mph. At 70mph the previous gantry had been showing 50mph for 23 seconds already when you passed it.

Generally, I'd prefer speeding to be deliberate rather than accidental.

I'd rather drivers were aware and in control of what they were doing than not paying attention to their vehicle and their surroundings.

just assumed when I see a number flash above a motorway then that’s the limit that is mandatory

If it's in a red circle it's mandatory. Any other signs are advisory. Pretty basic highway code stuff I would have thought.

That’s the idea… it’s supposed to be harsh.

I thought the idea was that it was supposed to be *equally* harsh. If it's gross income, then you're punished considerably extra if a higher rate tax payer as a percentage of your actual income.

Often the orange matrix signs are nonsense though

Agreed.
One recently instructed me to "pull off and have a break if tired "

I was a bit sleepy, and if anything, a quick tug whilst blatting along the M27 just made me more dozy.
Daft.

DrP

If it’s in a red circle it’s mandatory. Any other signs are advisory. Pretty basic highway code stuff I would have thought.

The trouble with this is that people who drive here, may not have taken lessons here, or read the highway code Transitory drivers (holiday, business etc) or immigrants from all over the world who've been granted a license on equivalence aren't used to what some of our more esoteric road signs and information mean. The Urban Freeway - No Stopping sign is pretty confusing if you stop to think about it. That big red cross...should mean you need to stop, or you've no right of way...maybe?

It's often not as clear cut as you'd think for some folk

I thought the idea was that it was supposed to be *equally* harsh. If it’s gross income, then you’re punished considerably extra if a higher rate tax payer as a percentage of your actual income.

You know how someone on minimum wage can barely afford to put a roof over their head and food in their mouths and someone who pays high rate tax gets to pay for a fancier roof and fancier food AND save for a fancy push bike? Well, that. A week's pre tax wages for someone on £57K is more easily missed without undue than a week for someone on the breadline.

The trouble with this is that people who drive here, may not have taken lessons here, or read the highway code Transitory drivers (holiday, business etc) or immigrants from all over the world who’ve been granted a license on equivalence aren’t used to what some of our more esoteric road signs and information mean.

Speed limit signs are pretty universal.

That would seem a little harsh to higher earners, as it’s a higher percentage of take home pay (i.e. it’s more weeks of actual take home pay for a higher rate taxpayer than for a lower rate taxpayer).

Don't worry, most of us higher earners are company directors and therefore weekly pay is only a pittance 😉

sure, speed limit on motorway is 70, right?

I'm just saying that what may appear, on the face of it, pretty straightforward to you, may not be for some-one else is all. Scots folk have no Smart M-ways, folks who rarely venture onto UK motorways, so on and on. Not saying it's right or wrong, just saying it can be confusing and easy to quickly rack up points is all.

The Urban Freeway – No Stopping sign is pretty confusing if you stop to think about it. That big red cross…should mean you need to stop, or you’ve no right of way…maybe?

Actually that sign is entirely unambiguous. The red circle around it means 'Must not'/'Do not' So a red circle around a fairly universal universal sign to stop means do not stop...

Not saying it’s right or wrong, just saying it can be confusing and easy to quickly rack up points is all.

There was a recent survey (off the back of the large number of drivers being fined for driving through ANPR gates in Low Traffic Neighbourhoods) which found that about half of drivers did not know the "No Vehicles" sign:

[img] ?1490612959[/img]

What's quite amazing is the ability of the average driver to lecture cyclists on "the Highway Code" (2-abreast, road tax, use of cycle lanes) while having absolutely **** all clue about it themselves. Irony.

The red circle around it means ‘Must not’/’Do not’ So a red circle around a fairly universal universal sign to stop means do not stop…

Like the don't stop for children one? 😉

sure, speed limit on motorway is 70, right?

I’m just saying that what may appear, on the face of it, pretty straightforward to you, may not be for some-one else is all. Scots folk have no Smart M-ways, folks who rarely venture onto UK motorways, so on and on. Not saying it’s right or wrong, just saying it can be confusing and easy to quickly rack up points is all.

Sorry Nick, I'm not running with this. Most people get on a motorway and if an illuminated sign tells them the speed limit is now lower than usual, they assume the speed limit is now lower. It's pretty simple. The 'is it mandatory, is it advisory' bobbins is the preserve of the internet dweeb. Everyone else just gets on with their life and tries to avoid killing each other.

Like the don’t stop for children one?

Being entirely pedantic that is not a road sign...

that about half of drivers did not know this sign:

Posted 14 seconds ago

Cheque book and pen?

The ‘is it mandatory, is it advisory’ bobbins is the reserve of the internet dweeb.

And the bulk of that Loophole Lawyer guy's business - bollocks about how the sign is 4.2mm smaller than it should be or positioned 0.4m closer to a junction than it should be...

Being entirely pedantic that is not a road sign…

Which is a shame, I think a bit less stopping for children would do them good. Bring back national service for those that survive etc etc etc.

I'd like to sympathise but I cant

1st rule in the highway code if its ringed in red its law.

2ndly..... 57isnt alot.... do **** off that's almost out household combined earnings

Your not wining many fans are you on this...

Not saying it’s right or wrong, just saying it can be confusing and easy to quickly rack up points is all.

No it really isn't confusing in the slightest- a speed limit sign is the same all over the UK as well as France, Germany, Spain, italy, etc.

If someone doesn't understand a speed limit sign then they don't deserve to be on the road.

What started as a simple question has now turned into a roasting on speeding, not understanding the RTA/Highway Code and earning too much and not being embarrassed about it, only on STW, the OP needs to just admit he was driving a white audi/BMW now for a full house of abuse ;o)

I think folk need to have a go on a managed motorway that's doing the 60/50/40 runs and so on with lane changes and so on to see how mad they are, folk doing the slow down for the gantry then accelerate off until the next one, folk lane changing like they're in an F1 race, undertaking galore, you're so busy looking up to make sure it's 60 and not 50 you're then distracted from all of the rest of it.

I think folk need to have a go on a managed motorway that’s doing the 60/50/40 runs and so on with lane changes and so on to see how mad they are, folk doing the slow down for the gantry then accelerate off until the next one, folk lane changing like they’re in an F1 race, undertaking galore, you’re so busy looking up to make sure it’s 60 and not 50 you’re then distracted from all of the rest of it.

Hundreds of thousands of people manage this every day.

But not reacting to a variable speed limit in time, when the motorway looks clear as far as I could see, it’s just a mistake.

Mistake my fat hairy arse! That reads like you made a conscious decision to ignore the posted limit because you couldn't see a justification for it.

Also, £57K not being much? Again, my fat hairy arse! I'll swap you my combined household income for a few months to give you time to reconsider that statement.

Your on triple my and many others salary so how would it be any kind of incentive for you to slow down if it’s less than a singular days wages

Should be the same for eg parking too. When £80 reduced to £40 for prompt payment is loose change, then why not just leave it where you want and take the risk of a fine that makes no odds. 'As cheap as' walking a few metres further is my assessment based on certain types of cars in certain Surrey towns.

And to Dr P. As a teenager I used to get suddenly and irretrievably horny from time to time. But since I've been of driving age, not so much. So I was delighted to see that the most service focused nation in the world still had my back if I needed it.

I think folk need to have a go on a managed motorway that’s doing the 60/50/40 runs and so on with lane changes and so on to see how mad they are, folk doing the slow down for the gantry then accelerate off until the next one, folk lane changing like they’re in an F1 race, undertaking galore, you’re so busy looking up to make sure it’s 60 and not 50 you’re then distracted from all of the rest of it.

If you're distracted by that, hand your licence in.

Sorry cougar but people need to stop quoting this kind of nonsense. [etc]

Mine does, I've cross-referenced it with GPS.

Think about it, if you're measuring rolling speed then it has to. It's not legal to under-read and there's any number of factors which could throw out even the most accurate of speedos. It'll be different if it's sunny.

It is standard in that fixed penalty is three points + £100.

... to a given threshold.

That’s never been the limit for an awareness course! 10%+2 (ie 57 in a 50) is the first speed at which a police force will normally prosecute

Ah, yes, you may well be right here.

Not so fast… the OP may not be the registered keeper.

Yeah, true, that was badly worded on my part.

you’re so busy looking up to make sure it’s 60 and not 50 you’re then distracted from all of the rest of it.

Apparently 10,000 drivers are over 12 points but aren’t banned due to the “hardship” exemption.

There is no "hardship" exemption, you've missed an important word there.

It is annoying that I get caught just for a mistake

You didn't make a mistake. Even if you didn't understand that the gantry limits were mandatory - and you should, this is basic stuff, do some reading - you were still knowingly and intentionally exceeding the regular 70 limit.

I did 90+ by accident

Driving Without Due Care and Attention, m'lud?

Look. I'm the worst person to be preachy about speed and I called how this thread would go like three posts in. But "ignorance is no defence" is a pillar of English Law. If you're going to jump onto the motorway and drive at or in excess of national speed limits then the onus is on you to learn how they work. The answer to "I didn't know" is "well, now you do" with a side order of "too bad" I'm afraid. Consider it a learning opportunity. You'd likely get more STW sympathy if you held up your hand that you'd ****ed up and got caught rather than presenting yourself as a victim.

"Smart" motorways aren't new and as a driver it's your responsibility to keep up to date. I still encounter drivers today who don't understand mini roundabouts, those things gained prevalence when I was learning to drive in the late 80s. Red=mandatory, amber=advisory, this again is not a new concept.

The argument that you avoid driving wherever possible doesn't really help your cause of driving 50% over the displayed speed limit "accidentally" I'm afraid. These aren't great combinations of factors.

https://www.insurethebox.com/raising-awareness-of-the-fatal-four/

fatal 4- speeding, using mobile device, drink driving, no seatbelt.
All of the individual points above cause deaths on roads. Its fact.
If you speed and get caught accept the consequences. Simple.

fatal 4- speeding, using mobile device, drink driving, no seatbelt.

1) By the very definition on that link it's not "speeding," it's inappropriate speed.

2) This is just inattentiveness. I'd suggest that "not looking where you're going" is the #1 cause whether that's playing with a phone, arguing with your partner, telling the kids to pipe down, eating your lunch, fannying about with stupid touch-screen ICE, dropping a fag end into your lap, being bored, or any manner of other distractions.

3) is kind of an extension of 2). You're pissed so you're incapable of paying sufficient attention. See also, many other substances.

4) Well, there's usually only one victim here isn't there. Too bad.

Curious that "crawling up the arse of the vehicle in front" isn't mentioned.

Inappropriate speed might be over 30mph in a 60 in the wrong road conditions - very heavy rain, snow etc.

Would smart motorways using average speed cameras to stop the “brake for the camera” behaviour be a good idea?

PS - could we add the close pass to make it the fatal five?

Well, there’s usually only one victim here isn’t there. Too bad.

Not really, there's more often than not someone else who has to live with that.

This is just inattentiveness. I’d suggest that “not looking where you’re going” is the #1 cause whether that’s playing with a phone, arguing with your partner, telling the kids to pipe down, eating your lunch, fannying about with stupid touch-screen ICE, dropping a fag end into your lap, being bored, or any manner of other distractions.

Expand that a little further and you could just say "driving". The reality is mobile phone use is indicated in a huge number of accidents (25% of *all* accidents in Australia, 21% of fatal accidents involving under 21s in the UK). Many many more than "pissing about with your radio "

Driving to Cornwall last month at about 5:00am on the M5 there was a 40 sign up. I went through at 40 but so many others were barrelling through at higher speeds that the gantry was going off like a firework display. 200m past it there was an RAC/Highways Agency bloke on the inside lane dropping cones because of a stranded vehicle. I wouldn’t have fancied his job for a golden pig.

40 for a reason. Although hitting him at that speed would still have been unpleasant for all concerned.

I suspect that you will be getting a hat full of points unless the speed limit changed the instant before you went under the camera.

Would smart motorways using average speed cameras to stop the “brake for the camera” behaviour be a good idea?

Would smart motorways using average speed cameras to stop the “brake for the camera” behaviour be a good idea?

It would hugely and surfing its a massive problem. Motorway cameras were due to all be upgraded to do point and average. It never happened. Money/privacy/upset drivers, I don't know why.

I’ve never understood why cameras need to be identifiable at all

Have you never watched Dr Strangeglove?

Surely they’d be safer and more effective if literally any stretch of road could have a camera

The theory goes, lots of people speed well aware they might be caught anywhere. Cameras are safety cameras and the reason they make it safer is most people don't speed when they know they'll be caught. It's why camera signs are effective(ish) despite there being no camera.

Personally I'd say ditch the safety argument, most people don't care, slap cameras everywhere and increase fines astronomically as people do care about cash.

I applaud this ^^^

I wonder if a cheaper alternative to "slap cameras everywhere" (and deal with all the infrastructure / loophole boll*cks) would be adding a black box with GPS to every car - and *reducing* fines, but making those fines much harder to avoid. If I had to pay £5 _every_ time I went over the speed limit, I'd watch my speed a lot more closely.

It could even be subsidised by insurance companies, they'd have to pay out a lot less if people's driving improved...

I think black boxing would be a bloody great idea, hooked to proximity detectors, sorry parking sensors, accelerometers, "rfid" in red lights, breathalysers and so on you could improve the roads no end.

To that extent I'd ditch fines all together and just take peoples licence off them every time they offended for n^(n-1) days.

It could even be subsidised by insurance companies, they’d have to pay out a lot less if people’s driving improved…

And lose all the lovely ambulance chasing fees, the rip off car repair & hire costs they can pass on to the other party, the expenses from court costs and so on?!

Bit of a circular argument - they'd have to pay out less but they'd also make a lot less and since insurance is basically a risk management strategy, it's a bit like a casino. The house always wins.

Don't get me wrong, if I was in charge, every vehicle would have a mandatory black box auto-uploading everything and generating auto-fines if speed limits were exceeded, it'd have fingerprint / voice / face recognition to start it, it would refuse to start if it was an unidentified / uninsured driver, service stations would have ANPR (no insurance/MOT = no unlock of fuel pump) but at the moment it's not really in the interests of insurance companies to actively play a role in road safety.

zilog6128
Full Member
you’re so busy looking up to make sure it’s 60 and not 50 you’re then distracted from all of the rest of it.

tell us you can’t drive safely without telling us you can’t drive safely 🤔

Again, was giving some reasoning from the daily use of managed motorways i have and what i see, but hey, don't let that stop you picking one line out of it and going into preach mode, like this entire thread appears to be!

don’t let that stop you picking one line out of it and going into preach mode,

Your post really did read like "I find it too hard"

Personally I’d say ditch the safety argument, most people don’t care, slap cameras everywhere and increase fines astronomically as people do care about cash.

Dangeourbrain for Minister of Transport!

I think we mostly get it right TBH. There has to a balance between educating folk to safer driving habits as well as enforcement. We do pretty well in stats showing numbers of deaths/ millions of citizens. I've driven in some places that you'd expect a good standard (Canada, I'm looking at you here) and their standards are frankly lousy by comparison.

Is it definitely a multiple of gross weekly income?

That would seem a little harsh to higher earners, as it’s a higher percentage of take home pay (i.e. it’s more weeks of actual take home pay for a higher rate taxpayer than for a lower rate taxpayer).

No it is actually based on "relevant income" which is "net". There's also a default rate of £440 for people who don't answer the questions properly, so magistrates can decide to stick to that rather than by punitive for your honesty if you say £1100/wk (and can consider other factors like your outgoings for 4 kids, 2 wives, etc). They also have discretion over things like the road being quiet, dry etc. to reduce the sentence and then will give you 1/3rd off for pleading guilty early so you might actually walk away with 440*0.75 (for being a driving god) * 2/3 (for not trying on a technicality) = £220 fine + 32 victim surcharge + 85 prosecution costs... payable at something like £50/month... Given parliament set a maximum fine of £2500 for speeding on the motorways and its not gone up since 1992 - some people might consider it generous. (There is an anomaly where fines for non-motorway speeding are limited to £1000 - its likely though that 72).

I’d probably get less of a fine for assaulting someone which seems ridiculous

In England the sentencing guidelines for "low level" (my words) assault are the same A/B/C fines so pushing someone to the ground and not causing an injury might result in a similar scale of fine to 74 in a 50. BUT of course, not that many high earners are getting involved incaught committing silly assaults. The courts often don't have particularly useful sentencing options available; I'll bet every magistrate in the country would welcome some more creative sentencing options than fines both for speeding and assault.

Dangeourbrain for Minister of Transport!

You wouldn't want to do that. For starters I'd completely pedestrianise every town/city centre and throw up free park and ride instead. I'd ban on street parking, ban car journeys under 3 miles and hang people who park within a mile of a school.

Cameras are safety cameras...

I've always thought it's weird that they were called safety cameras.

If you had a cat camera, that only took a picture when there wasn't a cat, it'd be pretty disappointing.

(and can consider other factors like your outgoings for 4 kids, 2 wives, etc)

Do local bike mechanics count towards that?

Do local bike mechanics count towards that?

LOL!

Do local bike mechanics count towards that?

I was only speeding in order to take my bike to the local mechanic* Your Honour!

*for the fourth time this week...

😉

The red circle around it means ‘Must not’/’Do not’ So a red circle around a fairly universal universal sign to stop means do not stop…

Wrong. It means it's a mandatory instruction. You must observe and apply whatever is in the circle.

Apparently 10,000 drivers are over 12 points but aren’t banned due to the “hardship” exemption.

It is an astonishing statistic isn't it; even if you correctly call it "Exceptional Hardship", or consider the actual number of 9382. But lets break it down.

There are c. 40M full driving license holders in the UK. So that is 0.023% of drivers...
About 36,000 drivers each year DO lose their license through totting up. Given there are about 1.9M with 3 points on their license, it does seem like accumulating points is a significant threat for most. Since points last for 3 years, we can probably assume that the 9382 are roughly evenly spread over that time, so ~3K people per annum... so fewer than 1:10 people who hit 12+ points successfully argue they would suffer exceptional hardship. Whilst you can certainly argue that something that affects one in ten of us is not that exceptional, I think you could argue that it is far from ordinary and perhaps the system is not as flawed as a headline "10K drivers still on the road with 12+ points" would make out.

Whilst you can certainly argue that something that affects one in ten of us is not that exceptional

And to further clarify, although 1 in 10 sounds a lot to be in exceptional hardship, numerically that's less than half of those getting 12points who are likely classed as in poverty (20% of the UK population pre covid, up to 23% last year and expect more this year).

Of course accumulation of 12 of more points when your life depends on it might mark out a bigger issue but being able to plead exceptional hardship isn't it.

We do pretty well in stats showing numbers of deaths/ millions of citizens.

"Pretty well" compared to other countries, not "pretty well" compared to what _could_ be done to lower deaths.

1750ish people per year dying in plane crashes in the UK, or in swimming pools, or using washing machines, would prompt *massive* changes in safety measures, and national outcry. It's only because it's normalised by happening everywhere that we shrug and assume everyone will naturally drive as dangerously as they're able to get away with, most of the time.

I wonder if a cheaper alternative to “slap cameras everywhere” (and deal with all the infrastructure / loophole boll*cks) would be adding a black box with GPS to every car – and *reducing* fines, but making those fines much harder to avoid. If I had to pay £5 _every_ time I went over the speed limit, I’d watch my speed a lot more closely.

The problem with any sort of 'client-side' solution is that the people who actually need to be black-boxed will just knobble it and plead ignorance.

You wouldn’t want to do that. For starters I’d completely pedestrianise every town/city centre and throw up free park and ride instead. I’d ban on street parking, ban car journeys under 3 miles and hang people who park within a mile of a school.

Would still get my vote other than the hanging bit as not into that.

Of course accumulation of 12 of more points when your life depends on it might mark out a bigger issue but being able to plead exceptional hardship isn’t it.

Years ago I accrued 12 points over three years. Two SP30s and an innocent screw-up due to a 20 minute gap between two consecutive insurance policies. At the time, my mum had just had a stroke and she was reliant on me for regular hospital transport. I tried this defence - it's not my mum's fault that I was an idiot - and the court ruling was something like "whilst I accept there is hardship, there is not exceptional hardship..." I netted a fine and a six month ban.

The notion that you can simply cry "hardship" and walk away with 72 points on your licence is the domain of tabloid newspaper headlines and Tory politicians. It's not that simple.

You wouldn’t want to do that. For starters I’d completely pedestrianise every town/city centre and throw up free park and ride instead. I’d ban on street parking, ban car journeys under 3 miles and hang people who park within a mile of a school.

Oh I like you very much.

hang people who park within a mile of a school

@dangeourbrain I live within a mile of a school. Am I allowed to park on my drive on compassionate grounds?  Or something.

Am I allowed to park on my drive on compassionate grounds? Or something.

Of course. Its your drive. I mean, chances are if you live within a mile of a school you'll be in a pedestrian zone so you won't actually be able to drive up to our away from your house but, you know, I've nothing against you parking your car on your land.

Would still get my vote other than the hanging bit as not into that.

Given the alternative is probably run by G4S or Serco I think I'll take the rope

Would still get my vote other than the hanging bit as not into that.

You can't have everything.

dangeourbrain- right on the money!

You can’t have everything.

Well that's it isn't it, hanging is obviously undeliverable once in office as not to put off anyone who doesn't agree but in a manifesto it's a vote winner with the older generation who you need to vote for you.
A lot like bringing back national service, though in practice when it turned out by national service I really meant actually serving the nation and was sending school leavers to help out with aid projects in darfur or help asylum seekers get to the UK without needing to paddle over the med on a lilo they'll be unhappy.

Of course by then they can mutter all they like but they're already stuck with me for 5 years.

You wouldn’t want to do that. For starters I’d completely pedestrianise every town/city centre and throw up free park and ride instead. I’d ban on street parking, ban car journeys under 3 miles and hang people who park within a mile of a school.

We've nearly got enough support to get you on a ballot paper.

Have to say, I much prefer your policies to the current bell ends.

dangeourbrain
Full Member

don’t let that stop you picking one line out of it and going into preach mode,
Your post really did read like “I find it too hard”

I was giving reasons why folk could find it hard, I use managed motorways around Bristol almost every day and see the same bad behaviours daily, speeding occurs all the time as well as those who do them regular know where the actual cameras are.

I also understand the way they vary the speeds, almost always the same limits at the same gantries, as well as the proper lane to be in for my exit, but those using them for the first time will be struggling I’d guess.

My driving manifesto - sorry if you read it before

1/ Black boxes for all. Hopefully never to be used, but if you do have an accident or get pulled for speeding or RLJ'ing or whatever, then the black box data is then accessible. Was it really the only time or do you always drive like a nobhead? Punishments to be based on behaviour as well as the incident.

2/ Mobile phone use - your SIM card and number is disabled / taken over by the authorities and a recorded message / text autoreply set up advising that the phone has been disabled for [appropriate time] because they were using it while driving. So everyone knows and it becomes socially unacceptable

3/ You KSI someone because of your driving / speeding / inattention. You go with the police officer and knock on a door and explain to their wife and kids that Daddy's never coming home again because you had to get to the pub 30s earlier than you would have if you weren't driving like a prick. I'd let you face that consequence as the kids eyes well up, you utter bastard.