wahl Posted April 9, 2011 Report Share Posted April 9, 2011 Motorists will be able to do up to 86mph but still escape fines and penalty points under a new police framework for speeding. Although the official limit on major roads remains at 70, drivers caught exceeding it by as much as 16mph will be allowed to keep a clean licence by agreeing to go on a speed awareness course which costs them around ?100. The money raised will be used to fund more speed cameras At ?100 a time, would raise more than ?58million. But critics say the framework is simply creating a new speed cash-cow industry and allowing motorists to break the law. Is this a money raising scam perpetrated by police? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
harry hayes Posted April 9, 2011 Report Share Posted April 9, 2011 I seem to be the defender of the police on here. Think the impetus will be coming from elsewhere - a home Office directive and/or the police authority - which is not quite the same thing as the police. Hardly think the police service would bein favour of anything which would make the roads less safe. Happy days Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
observer Posted April 9, 2011 Report Share Posted April 9, 2011 Perhaps, having lost journey time in Town (doing Rod's 20mph), it's intended to make up the lost time on the M/Way?! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bazj Posted April 9, 2011 Report Share Posted April 9, 2011 If we are in Europe....(reluctantly) why do we never seem to get the good things? We are edging ever nearer to the 20 blanket limits round towns so why can't we have the no speed limits on the motorways?? Damned unfair if you ask me! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
algy Posted April 9, 2011 Report Share Posted April 9, 2011 If the law say's the maximum speed allowable is 70 mph plus 10% or whatever, then that is what it should be, they are turning laws that were made to prevent motorists or motorcyclists from exceeding that figure into guidlines. I really must be getting old as I honestly believe this country is "going to the dogs" or to put it another way it's crap!. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dizzy Posted April 9, 2011 Report Share Posted April 9, 2011 I completely agree with you there Algy. If the speed limit on a motoryway is 70 then that's what it is and people should NOT exceed it..... end of. I haven't read/seen the news about this yet so can only comment from what I have read on here. I don't know if this is the case with this issue... but currently if drivers exceed a speed limit AND IT IS THEIR FIRST OFFENCE they are already given the option to pay to attend a 'Speed Awareness Course' rather than get the 3 points on their licence. I'm not sure but I think if they are caught over the speed limit again that option is not available and they get the points. Excluding Wales of course Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter T Posted April 9, 2011 Report Share Posted April 9, 2011 Algy, it started going downhill in the 60's. It's just going faster this last 20 years. The sad thing is that people seem quite happy for it to happen. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
observer Posted April 9, 2011 Report Share Posted April 9, 2011 Perhaps it's time they relaxed the law for the rest of us, after all it seems you can drive without a licence and insurance, run over and kill a young girl, and only get 3 months clink for it. Added to which, you can be an illegal immigrant and avoid deportation, cos you've sired a few sprogs! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dizzy Posted April 9, 2011 Report Share Posted April 9, 2011 Peter... I was born in the 60's are you blaming it all on me Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lt Kije Posted April 9, 2011 Report Share Posted April 9, 2011 Algy, it started going downhill in the 60's. It's just going faster this last 20 years. The sad thing is that people seem quite happy for it to happen. Utter crap Peter, Perhaps society has progressed and you have just failed to keep up Or your just stuck in the 1950s Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
observer Posted April 9, 2011 Report Share Posted April 9, 2011 Define "progress"? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lt Kije Posted April 9, 2011 Report Share Posted April 9, 2011 Before I do are you saying their has been non Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter T Posted April 10, 2011 Report Share Posted April 10, 2011 Algy, it started going downhill in the 60's. It's just going faster this last 20 years. The sad thing is that people seem quite happy for it to happen. Utter crap Peter, Perhaps society has progressed and you have just failed to keep up Or your just stuck in the 1950s How would you know Kije? Are you a Time Lord? Bit like education and spelling. They changed a very good system to learn to read and spell and we end up with people who cannot spell.(non) again? No Dizzy. It's is the likes of Blair and his cronies who pushed back the boundaries to break the rules that created the rubbish society that we have today. The only thing that has improved is technology. And if you are that blinkered Kije, that you can't see what is going on, I suggest you go and sit in a dark room. To give an example: Telling someone that their opinion is utter crap is hardly a sign of intelligence, more like the morals of a moron. Are you sure that you don't work for the council? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wolfie Posted April 10, 2011 Report Share Posted April 10, 2011 Peter, may I be so bold as to question your statement regarding everything going down hill from the 60's and then go on to blame Blair and his cronies. There appears to be a contradiction in your time line old chap. Unless Kije is correct and it's just utter crap. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
harry hayes Posted April 10, 2011 Report Share Posted April 10, 2011 Conditions for the populace have improved in a material way, but for every step forward there has been at least one in reverse since the sixties. Roy Jenkins and his ilk have a lot to answer for. Progressive ideas have not worked in most cases - education and law and order/punishment are two glaring examples. Happy days Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
observer Posted April 10, 2011 Report Share Posted April 10, 2011 Presume anything that improves the effiency and general wellbeing of the population can be considered "progress" - but some aspects of "progress" present new problems. EG. The improvements in medicine and food production has led to overpopulation and a distorted demographic. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter T Posted April 10, 2011 Report Share Posted April 10, 2011 Wolfie, when did I ever explain myself properly? The 60's brought the flower power lot from America who were also known as hippies. They spread the new way of life where drugs were common place and the rules were ignored. The Beatles and the Rolling Stones symbolised to the impressionable teenagers that that was the way to behave. Blair and Co grew up in these wild times and when they got control of the country, they encouraged a Society that had no morals, dumbed downed education, threw money at everything, even though they had none, and all in all, were totally irresponsible. And in my opinion, that came about because of the world that they grew up in. Discipline is the key to all Societies, and without it, the fabric of Society crumbles. And IMO this started in the 60's. There again, I could have said, that whilst Nero fiddled, Rome did burn. A bit like Prescott playing croquet. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lt Kije Posted April 10, 2011 Report Share Posted April 10, 2011 Discipline is the key to all Societies, and without it, the fabric of Society crumbles Feeling part of society helps, when you feel abandoned by it does not help, also I am taking it you grew up in the fifties, I think your exceptions' would have been lower. You cannot compare one generation with another as what people expect from society changes per generation, people in the 1500s would not have expected to live till they were 50. People growing up in the 1950s could have expected a job for life. People growing up in the 1980s no longer had the crutch of a job for life. It is frankly ridiculous to try to compare one generation with another. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter T Posted April 11, 2011 Report Share Posted April 11, 2011 Do you have children Kije? Do you teach them how to behave? Do you teach them Right and Wrong? Those examples should be the same for every generation. Die at 50? What a load of nonsense. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
observer Posted April 11, 2011 Report Share Posted April 11, 2011 Oh yes you can Kije - "compare one generation with another" - cos they are biologically identical. What is different is their social and enviromental conditioning - which conditions their response to their enviroment and events. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lt Kije Posted April 11, 2011 Report Share Posted April 11, 2011 Strange Peter in the 1500s life expectancy was between 30 and 40 Yes I have children Peter and I do teach them right from wrong, A big difference from when you grew up is more women work. In 1956 35% women were in work, and they left work when they got pregnant. Life was more affordable. Parents had the time to modicodle the kids. Today both parents have to work just to pay the mortgage Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter T Posted April 11, 2011 Report Share Posted April 11, 2011 The difference being that years ago, one car per family was the norm. Holidays abroad didn't happen, TV's were one per family etc. etc. IF people didn't want everything at once and only bought what they could afford, it might not be necessary to have the wives working. IMO they only do it to pay for all the extras rather than the essentials. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
observer Posted April 11, 2011 Report Share Posted April 11, 2011 "modicodle" - you mean a parent was actually at home to "bond" with their sprogs, rather than forcing small employers to pay out for p/maternity allowance?! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lt Kije Posted April 12, 2011 Report Share Posted April 12, 2011 You need two cars if both parents are working. Two weeks in Spain is cheaper than two weeks holiday in the UK. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter T Posted April 12, 2011 Report Share Posted April 12, 2011 Alternative transport available! Holidays are NOT compulsory! And one parent should be at home with the child until he/she is at least 5 to give it the basic s in life, rather than farming them out to someone else. (Unless a close family member) Children are becoming an accessory these days, as seen by the number of nurseries everywhere. Holidays in the UK support our economy even if they are dearer. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.