Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by robbo3045)
    So where does it end... if these potential roads were upgraded to a 60mph limit, it would only encourage people like the OP to further exceed this limit.

    Another fact is that most people exceed the limit. The higher the speed limit, the higher people will go to exceed them.
    You are assuming that the OP breaks the limit in spite of it. Rather than breaking the limit because he judged it safe to do so.

    The fact of the matter is that the safety record of the UNLIMITED SPEED autobahns in Germany is GREATER than the safety record of speed-limited highways all over Europe.

    There is absolutely no evidence that increasing the speed limit, or removing the speed limit altogether increases the risk of accident. However, there is evidence in Germany that the opposite actually happens.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    Actually I see were some people are coming from but the more refined powerful cars that some people drive in here, if we aren't paying attention can be doing 60 quite easily......

    Refinement can be a dangerous thing, there's nothing between 70 and 110 in my car, now the wheels are perfectly balanced and the tracking done, no wind noise, no control issues, no front end lift.

    But yes 60 in 30 is stupid, imagine hitting even a sheep at those speed, big mess, surely death.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    Yes but there a very few derestricted autobahns in Germany, the majority have restrictions and we're talking about a rural area not a mass 4 lane+ motorway!
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    well slow down then you eejit.
    christ, what is it with people thinking that speed limits show the minimum not maximum speed one can drive at. makes me angry ;/
    x
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Two words:

    SLOW DOWN!

    You'd think you'd learn from your mistakes but clearly not...
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Phugoid)
    Not without seeing the road, no.

    Just because the government has labelled a road a 30 road does not mean that 60mph is not suitable for that type of road.

    For all you know, the road is a straight wide road running through the middle of an empty field miles away from any children, animals, pedestrians or other hazards.

    To make a judgment of the OP based on the idea that the government are right and everybody else is wrong is not a good idea. Especially when the government we speak of is largely incompetent, especially when it comes to driving.

    Again, I'm not saying the OP was in the right. It may well have been a road in a built up area, in the middle of the day, with children, pedestrians, hazards and bends. But without knowing that, you have absolutely no basis for judgment without resorting to trusting the government's word on things. Bad idea, as I've said, since anybody who drives a car competently can see that quite a lot of roads have been labelled quite mistakenly indeed.

    I am not defending the OP, I am simply retaining judgment until I have seen the facts.
    I can see the point you're getting at but I honestly do not know of a road which has a 30mph limit which should be 60mph (in our opinion). I certainly don't know any roads that are in the middle of nowhere with no buildings or likely pedestrians which are limited to 30...
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by lalalee-anne)
    well slow down then you eejit.
    christ, what is it with people thinking that speed limits show the minimum not maximum speed one can drive at. makes me angry ;/
    x


    Now that's minimum speed
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    If you get caught doing that sort of speed then you will not get away with it.

    It is possible to get off tickets if you can prove that what they used to measure your speed was not calibrated correctly or using a number of other factors but while all of these make the reading less accurate, when you are that far over the limit the doubt they would create would be nowhere near enough to show that there is a chance you were doing less than 30.

    Basically you WILL lose your license and I hope to god that you either become more sensible or get hit by a car doing 60 in a 30 just to show you how stupid that sort of speed is.
    Offline

    9
    ReputationRep:
    the OP says the road was clear, fair enough, but how come he wasn't aware of a police vehicle or speed camera ahead. if he can't spot either then how is he sure that the road is safe and no-one is going to step on the road.

    i honestly think this is a troll thread
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by shorty.loves.angels)
    I can see the point you're getting at but I honestly do not know of a road which has a 30mph limit which should be 60mph (in our opinion). I certainly don't know any roads that are in the middle of nowhere with no buildings or likely pedestrians which are limited to 30...
    They aren't that common, but they do exist. I know a few near where I live. And my opinion on these roads is echoed by other safe, reliable drivers with a clean record, like me.

    It's a lot more common to see roads that are 40 and should be 50/60, or see roads that are 60, but should be 70. Or see roads that are 30 and should be 40/50.

    30 to 60 is a big jump, but two roads near where I live spring to mind, and I'm sure there are other examples outside my area.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by mug51)
    the OP says the road was clear, fair enough, but how come he wasn't aware of a police vehicle or speed camera ahead. if he can't spot either then how is he sure that the road is safe and no-one is going to step on the road.

    i honestly think this is a troll thread
    Because, as I've explained above, the main objective of a police officer is to catch as many speeders as possible. And a key technique which helps the officer to do this is to be as sneaky as possible, and remain as hidden as possible. They don't just stand at the side of the road in full fluorescent kit, with blue lights flashing and the front of a police car sticking out of a sideroad. They are decidedly discrete, unlike most of the dangerous things which lurk on such clear open roads.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by D-Day)
    Punctuation is your friend.
    Well, it sounds as if a judge/magistrate is about to put a full stop to him driving for a while!


    OP, you were doing more than twice the legal limit having already been done for speeding less than a month previously. There is no way that you are going to talk your way out of it - it really doesn't matter if the speed limit was, in your opinion, ridiculously low...the fact remains that you were travelling at an excessive speed.

    How new a driver are you? You are probably looking at a 12 month ban (minimum) and possibly re-taking your test in order to get you license back again.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by [email protected])


    Now that's minimum speed
    I really wish there were more of these on some roads.

    I think it's completely fair that people who do 30/40 on a 60 road should be fined for dangerous driving in the same way that somebody doing 70 on a 60 road gets fined.

    Minimum speed requirements should be given to all roads, and officers of the law should have the power to charge people who disobey them.
    Offline

    4
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Phugoid)
    Because, as I've explained above, the main objective of a police officer is to catch as many speeders as possible. And a key technique which helps the officer to do this is to be as sneaky as possible, and remain as hidden as possible. They don't just stand at the side of the road in full fluorescent kit, with blue lights flashing and the front of a police car sticking out of a sideroad. They are decidedly discrete, unlike most of the dangerous things which lurk on such clear open roads.
    But considering that legally all drivers should always adhere to the speed limit, then any attempt to hide or mask in as not to be seen, combats against those who have a natural tendency to speed, and are not just slowing down for the brief moment they see the camera.

    The van is fluorescent, the GATSO's are flourescent - there are many signs telling you speed camera's operate in the area. I think we got it good.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    Shouldn't be sucha a **** then
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by robbo3045)
    But considering that legally all drivers should always adhere to the speed limit, then any attempt to hide or mask in as not to be seen, combats against those who have a natural tendency to speed, and are not just slowing down for the brief moment they see the camera.

    The van is fluorescent, the GATSO's are flourescent - there are many signs telling you speed camera's operate in the area. I think we got it good.
    Your point was that the OP must have been going too fast for the road, otherwise he would have seen a police officer tracking his speed.

    My refutation of that point was that officers do not make themselves easily seeable when they are tracking vehicles on a certain road. Therefore, your logic holds absolutely not water. Whether or not the officer should hide himself is completely irrelevant to the line of thought you were trying to use to justify your judgment of the OP.

    The fact of the matter is that it does NOT logically follow that the OP was going too fast to be safe on the road if he was unable to see the officer who was tracking him, and the reason for that is that the officers purposefully make themselves difficult to see, even for drivers who are doing the speed limit.

    Flourescence doesn't do **** if it's hidden behind a bush.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    "I'll have a day saver, please" - You'll be needing this one.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Well, you're stupid enough to go double the speed limit, and in a 30 aswell which means it was most likely near houses or a school. You're also stupid enough to do this twice, and to come on here and ask how to "get away with it"?

    You shouldn't get away with it. It's people like you that give guys higher insurance! Not to mention cause a great deal of motoring accidents.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by BurntDesire™)
    Ahh that's bad lol :o: Can you give some details on how exactly he clocked you doing 40? Was he stationary or in the traffic?
    He was pretty much hiding behind a bush with a camera. His car was hidden down a back road as well which I saw as I was leaving. So it came as a surprise to see a cop walk out into the road and stop me.
    But I can't complain as I broke the law.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Phugoid)
    Your point was that the OP must have been going too fast for the road, otherwise he would have seen a police officer tracking his speed.

    My refutation of that point was that officers do not make themselves easily seeable when they are tracking vehicles on a certain road. Therefore, your logic holds absolutely not water. Whether or not the officer should hide himself is completely irrelevant to the line of thought you were trying to use to justify your judgment of the OP.

    The fact of the matter is that it does NOT logically follow that the OP was going too fast to be safe on the road if he was unable to see the officer who was tracking him, and the reason for that is that the officers purposefully make themselves difficult to see, even for drivers who are doing the speed limit.

    Flourescence doesn't do **** if it's hidden behind a bush.
    My God how have you had the patience to see this through to the end? You're completely right of course, and I've worn my hand down to the stump from the constant facepalming I've been doing from some of the people in this thread, congratulations, you're officially a robot hah.
 
 
 
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    What's your favourite Christmas sweets?
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

    Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

    Quick reply
    Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.