Guest Posted March 10, 2014 Share Posted March 10, 2014 Since what he said wasn't offensive (even if you didn't like it) I see no reason why he shouldn't say it. ........................ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ECCOnoob Posted March 10, 2014 Share Posted March 10, 2014 Do you take this tone with people in real life to peoples faces? thought not. Really? You think not. I think so. When it comes to speeding absolutely. Law is the law. Having formally had business connections with SYP Safety Camera partnership and also as a commercial lawyer. I state the legal facts as bluntly to my opponents and lay persons as I do in my posts. The law is what it is. Breach it and you will face said consequences. I see no defence for wriggling out of it and get extremely frustrated with people constantly trying to disguise speeding as some kind of none offence. Speeding is a criminal offence. Like it or not - if you know you are doing 35 in a 30 you are fully aware you are breaking the law and are therefore at risk of being penalised for it. No ifs, not buts. Simple as that. If you didn't realise you were doing 35 in a 30 well that's just tough. You learn the lesson that you should have been concentrating on your driving more. Im not saying that people are perfect and we are all guilty of going over the limit. I will hold my hand up and say I have been done twice for it. However, unlike the many crybabies who pointlessly try to make excuses, slag off the police, blame the government and waste time with their silly appeals some of us just deal with it like grown ups. We know we were wrong. We got busted. We pay the fine and take the points/course offer. That's what I say here just as much as I would say it to someone's face if I met them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeffrey Shaw Posted March 10, 2014 Share Posted March 10, 2014 Rescue may be at hand, if new Law Commission proposals are enacted. They would remove the "utmost good faith ['uberrimae fidei']" rule and replace it with a much clearer and fairer "Duty of fair presentation". See http://lawcommission.justice.gov.uk/consultations/insurance-draft-clauses.htm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
muckymurphy Posted March 11, 2014 Share Posted March 11, 2014 Sorry, what was UKIP's policies on traffic light offences and speed cameras?? I seem to have missed that one. ....actually dont bother I found the quote from mental Godfrey myself. He said "If speed killed people there would be no Formula One racing "its speed in the wrong place that kills people" So, as locations of speed cameras are set by the highways authority and NOT the police and those locations are based on strict quotas of accident statistics - you get busted speeding by a camera. It was speeding in the wrong place wasn't it. 31 in a 30 is over the limit. Argue the toss all you want. Its speeding therefore breaking the law. Breaking the law (even a minor thing) has consequences. In this case, potential to lose your licence and get hit by an increase in your insurance premiums. Get over it. first bold....... firstly, absolute rubbish. herringthorpe valley road was once one of the deadliest roads in south yorkshire yet pleas for crossings and speed cameras fell on deaf ears. sheffield parkway has a camera which was originally in a zone set at 30mph but because the film ran out faster than a papparatzis, they increased the limit to 40mph. just does not make sense! councils finance the cameras not the highways agencies. they are expensive otherwise every road would have one. second bold..... i was stating a fact, not arguing the toss. showing how discretion goes to the wall when there is money to be made. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.