The Best Way To Avoid A Speeding Fine

[biketrialler]

Andyroo, thats a load of shit, you are completely axaggerating, or must be a completely f**ktarded driver if you have that kind of difficulty, its not hard to keep below 30 if you know theres a camera, even on a hill, while still being able to see the road in front of you in case something jumps out. If youre going down a hill, you can stick it down a gear and use a bit of engine braking, or just simply use the brakes - if youre driving in an area where you think theres a chance of people stepping out without looking anyway and youre having to slow down to below 30 just to please a speed camera youre a complete wanker.

Also, its known that if you hit someone at 30 they have a much higher chance of surviving than hitting them at 40.

Edited December 23, 2005 by Bennifer

[andyroo]

Andyroo, thats a load of shit, you are completely axaggerating, or must be a completely f**ktarded driver if you have that kind of difficulty, its not hard to keep below 30 if you know theres a camera, even on a hill, while still being able to see the road in front of you in case something jumps out. If youre going down a hill, you can stick it down a gear and use a bit of engine braking, or just simply use the brakes - if youre driving in an area where you think theres a chance of people stepping out without looking anyway and youre having to slow down to below 30 just to please a speed camera youre a complete wanker.

Also, its known that if you hit someone at 30 they have a much higher chance of surviving than hitting them at 40.

I suppose you drive everywhere at 25mph do you? We dont all drive little 1 litre heaps, and when youve got school children lining the roads on either side, with any one of them just waiting for the opportunity to run out in front of your car, and you want to get to work, you want to be doing the speed limit. In fact, Mr. Supersafedriver, my driving instructor told me that slowing down to 25mph for speed cameras is more dangerous than doing 31 because people will misjudge your speed.

And once again, obvioulsy being hit at 30 mph rather than 40 will do less damage, if the hit is exactly the same... you can kill someone at thirty, and someone can get off and walk at 50, so dont just quote me what youve heard off of adverts that dress things up to sound more scary.

Im not saying that speeding is a good thing, what I am saying is that speed cameras are more of a distraction than a help on some roads where they really arent needed, and that pedestrians need to use the pedestrian croosings rather than just blindly stepping out in front of cars.

Being distracted to make sure you arent going 31mph where there are lots of stupid school kids just doesnt make sense.

And theres no need to be a complete cock about it either, stop trying to do the internet attitude thing, it just makes you come across as insecure.

[steve sturt]

Make sure your doing 172mph+

I want to hit the camera at the top of our street with a sledgehammer, whens the best time to do it.

Best way to make yourself invisible is to get a small portable radio, tuned into Heart FM or something equally mundane, and a yellow workmans jakcet. You'd be surprised how well this works.

[Michael Hardman]

Sounds like a plan I ask Dan to get me one from the site hes on.

[Tomm]

And once again, obvioulsy being hit at 30 mph rather than 40 will do less damage, if the hit is exactly the same... you can kill someone at thirty, and someone can get off and walk at 50, so dont just quote me what youve heard off of adverts that dress things up to sound more scary.

I think the statistic is that if you hit someone at 30mph, 2 in 10 will die. At 40 mph, 8 in 10 will die. Yes, there are obviously the very lucky/unlucky ones, but to say speeding makes no difference is also stupid. You have to play the percentages

Having said that, I'm not a big fan of speed cameras. I don't really think that they're making the world safer, people just know how to avoid them. Plus they can't catch the drunk drivers, the people driving wrecklessly etc like a real person can. But I really, really, don't want to get into an argument over how good speed cameras are. If you don't break the law, you won't get a fine

[PaRtZ]

I agree with androo really. (Before I start Im not driving yet)

Theres a lot of pressure put on new drivers to know everything about the road, what every sign means, what the restrictions are in each area, how a car works, what hazards to look out for etc. etc. Whereas pedestrians... what? they're just born with 2 feet and use them.

I witness a lot of people who do just walk blindly out into the road and I can honestly say that i am NOT one of them. If people can't be bothered to look where they're going then its their own fault to be honest. Sorry if that seems a little harsh but thats just what I believe

And now for something, completely contradictory

Speeding Saves lives

[andyroo]

I think the statistic is that if you hit someone at 30mph, 2 in 10 will die. At 40 mph, 8 in 10 will die. Yes, there are obviously the very lucky/unlucky ones, but to say speeding makes no difference is also stupid. You have to play the percentages

Having said that, I'm not a big fan of speed cameras. I don't really think that they're making the world safer, people just know how to avoid them. Plus they can't catch the drunk drivers, the people driving wrecklessly etc like a real person can. But I really, really, don't want to get into an argument over how good speed cameras are. If you don't break the law, you won't get a fine

Thats all very well, but im not talkaing about this difference between 30 and 40... I'm talking about the fact that kids run out in front of your car, so you need to be on full alert, but when you are concentrating on stoping your speed nudging slightly over 30 through a camera, your eyes are not on the road, and one of these stupid kids who runs out into the road is more likely to get hit.

Therefore, speed cameras are a big risk to pedestrians, seeing as 90% of all accidents with peds are caused by them walking out in front of your car with a few metres to spare, and if one of those few seconds to save the persons life is spent checking to see if your speed hasnt crept over 30 because of a speed camera, then the accident was caused by the presence of the camera.

Get my point?

Speed cameras should be ripped up and replaced with the timers that work out your average speed through a section of road

Edited December 23, 2005 by andyroo

[sfboy]

I still do not understand why the speed limit is not displayed on the back of speed cameras, which would would stop people stamping on the brake as they crap themself when they see it.

[Rich Pearson]

However you look at it, people will always speed. There will always be people on the roads who will either simply not care that they are speeding, or, who will recklessley go out of their way to speed in order to get some kind of thrill out of it. Having a look in the Abingdon newspaper archives at around about May 2004 should be enough to convince anyone about the dangers of breaking the speed limit. Yet speed cameras, traffic officers and other speed-catching meathods will only decrease the number of people who speed, not wipe that number out. So all I'm saying is, if you don't want to drive fast, don't. Other people will no matter what you say, just remember that there is a difference between driving faster than the speed limit and driving dangerously. 90mph on the motorway is not dangerous; a policecar with no lights, siren, or indeed apparent intent of anything other than motorway patrolling has overtaken me before now when I was doing 85, without me being stopped. 40mph in a small town's highstreet is dangerous.

Make sure your doing 172mph+

Its 176mph

Rich

Edited December 23, 2005 by karsonlevoret

[Krisboats]

My mum had her speeding ticket cancelled when they put the time of the infringement wrong in the first letter they sent her.

They said she was speeding an hour earlier than she was and she asked them to show her a time and date stamped picture of this happening because she was in a work meeting when they said she was speeding.

They let her off on the basis that because they got the time wrong, in a court it would be seen as incompetance and they would probably lose because they may have gotten other factors wrong as well.... like her actual speed.

and before anyone starts off on one she was caught doing 31mph, which is only one above the limit so there was no wreckless driving involved.

[Extreme_biker0]

She obviously should have been spending less time concentrating on the road and more time watching her speedometer!

I share andyroos POV.

Edited December 24, 2005 by Extreme_biker0

[The Foamoi Refresher]

speeding=dangerous simple as that, unless its in a controlled envionmet(formula 1, etc), but even then speeding is still dangerous, and people die because of it

really you have to investigate every case, to see wether its the drivers, or the victims fault,

speeding is f**king stupid, do not agree with it one bit.just shouldnt be done on the roads

luisio

[manxrider]

Can you imagine if someone put a box on the camera, someone went 40 instead of 30 and hit a kid and killed the kid instantly? Could you imagine the papers?

What gives Jeremy Clarkson the right to go around and promote that sort of stuff, hes nothing but a twat. Fair enough, hes a very entertaining presenter but the world doesn't revolve around him and his fast cars. I wish the fat tosser would think before he opened his mouth sometimes.

Actully I dont know what he's complaining about I mean clarkson he lives on the Isle of man same as me and there is no speed cameras and on part of the TT course " The mountain" there is'nt a speed limit anyway.

Actully he has a house on the Isle of Man not sure if he lives here all of the time though .

[Sam Nichols]

speeding is f**king stupid, do not agree with it one bit.just shouldnt be done on the roads

Me doing 50 in a 35 today proabably wassed you off a bit then? Sorry!

Anyhoo, you are all wrong. The best way to avoid speeding fines is to steal a car remove the number plates, respray, find a similar looking car and copy down the plates, get some plates made up and go speed.

Jolly good show

[Mark W]

Thats all very well, but im not talkaing about this difference between 30 and 40... I'm talking about the fact that kids run out in front of your car, so you need to be on full alert, but when you are concentrating on stoping your speed nudging slightly over 30 through a camera, your eyes are not on the road, and one of these stupid kids who runs out into the road is more likely to get hit.

Therefore, speed cameras are a big risk to pedestrians, seeing as 90% of all accidents with peds are caused by them walking out in front of your car with a few metres to spare, and if one of those few seconds to save the persons life is spent checking to see if your speed hasnt crept over 30 because of a speed camera, then the accident was caused by the presence of the camera.

Get my point?

Speed cameras should be ripped up and replaced with the timers that work out your average speed through a section of road

I really don't agree... I've never found it hard to keep below 30, at all? I've crept over a tiny amount on super clear stretches, but it's not hard to keep it below/on 30. You can still check people are there without suddenly mashing the accelerator?

Ah well, we'll just have to "agree to disagree" or whatever that shit is...

[Prawny Baby]

something ive often wondered....

to all the people so dead set against speeding..... what if the limits were different?

if a 30 zone were infact 40, and the motorway speed limit infact 90, would you continue to drive at 30 and 70? or 28 and 68? or 40 and 90?

im afraid speeding is TOTALLY acceptable..... i will be honest, i pay NO ATTENTION to speed limits WHATSOEVER.

i will drive at a speed that I (AND I ALONE) deem safe and appropriate for the conditions, which i always asses very carefully.....

if its an open country road, that you know well, u know the danger spots, you know when people comming the other way are likely to be cutting corners, and you know your abilities, i see no problem in breaking the 60mph speed limit....

similarly, if your driving down the m5 at 3am in a thundering hail storm, i see no need to drive at 70............. 50 would probably be far more appropriate....

yes i will do 30mph along a street..... as it is often a fairly appropriate speed. but where the road permits i see no need to remain at 30mph..... and i wont! its as simple as that..... if its busy i may do 25, if there no one around and i can see there are no people about to jump out, i may do 40....

the problem is, that not many people share my veiw..... many young people DONT know the correct time and place for fast driving, and will go as fast as possible everywhere in order to show off.....

sadly, because of this, the speed limits have to be enforced.... or the silly chavs go and die

i totally agree with cameras at accident black spots, because if theres a camera there, you ARE going to slow down..... and i guess that will save a few lives

but putting a fiat van in a motorway layby and nicking people for doing 88mph down the motorway is just a complete joke!

speed limits are such a joke.....

end of story....

Merry Christmas-im off to bed

[andyroo]

I really don't agree... I've never found it hard to keep below 30, at all? I've crept over a tiny amount on super clear stretches, but it's not hard to keep it below/on 30. You can still check people are there without suddenly mashing the accelerator?

Ah well, we'll just have to "agree to disagree" or whatever that shit is...

So when your following traffic in a 2litre turbo and the traffic is moving at 32mph, down a hill that changes gradient slightly every metre or so, you can keep at 29-30mph without looking at the speedo?

Its all very well and good going at 25mph an hour just to be safe, but then you risk endangering cars behind you, that may be carrying mum, dad, child and baby... hmm; decisions, decisions...

Another factor is that car companies are allowed a 10% discrepency on the indicated speed, i.e 30 mph on the clock is actually 27mph...

Merry Christmas!

Edited December 25, 2005 by andyroo

[PaRtZ]

i will drive at a speed that I (AND I ALONE) deem safe and appropriate for the conditions, which i always asses very carefully.....

Thats all very well for you, but there are people in this world who think "meh my car can go to 110, so that means i can drive it safely at 100"

Its like drink driving, "This half pint has had no effect on me at all" Thats f*cking bollocks. ANY amount of alcohol has an affect on you, just because you're not paralytic doesn't mean its not there....

[The Foamoi Refresher]

Its like drink driving, "This half pint has had no effect on me at all" Thats f*cking bollocks. ANY amount of alcohol has an affect on you, just because you're not paralytic doesn't mean its not there....

well not really, depends on what your metabelism is like, and how you can handle alcohol.

different poeple have different tolerences to drinking, some people may be able to have 3pints and still be under the legal limit

and others may only have half a pint and be over the limit, your wrong

luisio

Edited December 25, 2005 by The Foamoi Refresher

[Thurston]

well not really, depends on what your metabelism is like, and how you can handle alcohol.

different poeple have different tolerences to drinking, some people may be able to have 3pints and still be under the legal limit

and others may only have half a pint and be over the limit, your wrong

luisio

Nice come back there, bt yes you are right in what your saying about some people handling drink better than others