Are you a flasher ?

rizla01 said:
And if you passed a GATSO at that time you would get off with that excuse.

Yeah Right.

According to the law you may NOT exceed the speed limit for ANY reason - even common sense.

That is the Police state in which we live, I'm afraid.




Your question was as I recall, which I did.

You did NOT ask for someone to JUSTIFY it.

I gave reason - not justification.

Don't twist statements to justify your position.
Click to expand...


I really don't think we need to go down the extremes of "Police state". I already explained a situation where you are allowed to break the speed limit. Another is where you have an emergency vehicle behind you and you have no way to get out of their way. The first, as I said, was told to me by someone in authority to know and the second is from personal experience.

Also, Steve asked for a "valid" reason, so I'm thinking he HAS asked for someone to Justify it so I don't believe he has twisted anything.
 
In answer to the earlier questions about getting a ticket for going marginally over the limit, I do know somebody who got one for 31mph in a 30 zone. It was some years ago, I don't see him any more, so I can't give any more info.
 
fabs said:
Another is where you have an emergency vehicle behind you and you have no way to get out of their way. The first, as I said, was told to me by someone in authority to know and the second is from personal experience.
Click to expand...

Was your personal experience that you got taken to court and were told by a judge that you were acting legally though, or did you just not get pulled up when you did it?

Surely speeding is illegal, end of. No ifs buts or maybes. To have actual loopholes in the law would render it completely useless. Fortunately, PC's tend to use common sense, so will not pull you up if you press on a little to get out of their way. (As I normally do if required.) HOWEVER: If you were to go through a speed camera at this time, you would still get a ticket and would have to go to court to argue your case. The judge would then need to use common sense to see that your reasons were justified and valid - but could just give you the points and fine anyway, regardless of your reasoning.

In the same way - if you break a red light to allow an emergency vehicle to get through - you can stilll get a ticket for breaking a red light. It is the emergency vehicle driver's responsibility to get through the traffic conditions.
I think there was a thread here about it a while back where someone pulled through a light that they were waiting at to allow an ambulance through, which triggered a red light camera. They tried to explain in court and still got the fine and points.
 
OutLore said:
Was your personal experience that you got taken to court and were told by a judge that you were acting legally though, or did you just not get pulled up when you did it?

Surely speeding is illegal, end of. No ifs buts or maybes. To have actual loopholes in the law would render it completely useless. Fortunately, PC's tend to use common sense, so will not pull you up if you press on a little to get out of their way. (As I normally do if required.) HOWEVER: If you were to go through a speed camera at this time, you would still get a ticket and would have to go to court to argue your case. The judge would then need to use common sense to see that your reasons were justified and valid - but could just give you the points and fine anyway, regardless of your reasoning.

In the same way - if you break a red light to allow an emergency vehicle to get through - you can stilll get a ticket for breaking a red light. It is the emergency vehicle driver's responsibility to get through the traffic conditions.
I think there was a thread here about it a while back where someone pulled through a light that they were waiting at to allow an ambulance through, which triggered a red light camera. They tried to explain in court and still got the fine and points.
Click to expand...

Well we were talking about a "valid" reason rather than "legal", but you are quite right, there is no legal reason to break the speed limit.

My experience was that I was driving down a one way street (with no pavement or anywhere to pull over) when a police car came up behind me. I looked in my mirror, blues and twos going, and the driver signalled for me to "go", so I did. Speed limit was 40 and I got up to 80 before the road widened. I even got a thumbs up as he went past me. It's pretty unlikely that he would have pulled me over.
 
fabs said:
Well we were talking about a "valid" reason rather than "legal", but you are quite right, there is no legal reason to break the speed limit.

My experience was that I was driving down a one way street (with no pavement or anywhere to pull over) when a police car came up behind me. I looked in my mirror, blues and twos going, and the driver signalled for me to "go", so I did. Speed limit was 40 and I got up to 80 before the road widened. I even got a thumbs up as he went past me. It's pretty unlikely that he would have pulled me over.
Click to expand...

Yeah, sounds like he had bigger fish to fry that day :D
 
trencheel303 said:
Are you aware that the braking distance at 40mph is 36 metres, vice 23 metres at 30mph, and that at 35mph you are far more likely to kill someone if you hit them than at 30?

The speed limit is there for a reason, I'm sick of people who think it doesn't apply to them.
Click to expand...


No its not.

It probably was in 1967 or whenever when everyone had a ford anglia with drum brakes.

Maybe an extreme example but did you not see the Top Gear when the Merc SLR McLaren went from 120 to 0 in less distance than the highway code states for 60 to 0.
 
Well then my 2007 Highway Code book that I have not an arm's length from me is wrong.

PS: You still haven't left me feedback for the film I bought from you ;)
 
Lynton said:
No its not.

It probably was in 1967 or whenever when everyone had a ford anglia with drum brakes.

Maybe an extreme example but did you not see the Top Gear when the Merc SLR McLaren went from 120 to 0 in less distance than the highway code states for 60 to 0.
Click to expand...

The ashton-mackay research is from is the 80s and car design has changed a lot since then. The speeds they refer to are *impact* speeds not free travelling speeds. The vast majority of drivers react before potentially hitting someone. Also it has been misquoted and misused as it was never intended to be about this issue. Survivability rates vary widely at the same speeds and vary a lot with the type, height and weight of the pedestrian involved and the precise vehicle.

The stick within the limit argument is simplistic and does nothing to encourage drivers to think. Any fool can match the number on the lollipop. It does not divest you of responsibility.

Which is a better. A person hit at 29 mph or a person not hit at all?
 
srichards said:
The ashton-mackay research is from is the 80s and car design has changed a lot since then. The speeds they refer to are *impact* speeds not free travelling speeds. The vast majority of drivers react before potentially hitting someone. Also it has been misquoted and misused as it was never intended to be about this issue. Survivability rates vary widely at the same speeds and vary a lot with the type, height and weight of the pedestrian involved and the precise vehicle.

The stick within the limit argument is simplistic and does nothing to encourage drivers to think. Any fool can match the number on the lollipop. It does not divest you of responsibility.

Which is a better. A person hit at 29 mph or a person not hit at all?
Click to expand...

Eh?


I thought we were quoting the thinking and stopping distances off the highway code from back when the Model T was the supercar.

Hmm 80's that well known decade of automotive engineering. The fiat Strada, the Maestro, the Montego.

Where above did I condone speeding. I just merely pointed out some very out of date information that in published to this day. I think it better the pedestrian stays on the pavement, and not get in the way of cars (joke!)



However, I will concede that I am often guilty of >70mph on a motorway....:shrug: as is about 90% of the motoring population.
 
Last edited:
I'd be interested to know - those of you here who are loudly exclaiming that there is no excuse whatsoever for exceeding the speed limit - what cars do you drive...?

I'm willing to bet that those of us with a more 'flexible' approach to speed restrictions, i.e. prepared to go a bit faster for short periods where we consider it safe to do so, to either overtake, clear obastacles, or just because we happen to think that 50mph on a dual carriageways is bloody stupid (A3 into London, anyone? BTW, I'm not talking about hooning around at 70mph in a bulit-up areas past schoolyards and hospitals) - probably drive faster, more powerful (i.e. expensive) cars, whereas those who are doing a bit of 'soapboxing' here, probably drive tin-sheds.
 
I'm sure it's human nature, if you own a car that can do 150+ and accelerate like greased lightning then you are going to take advantage of it. The vehicle I drive most is a van, legally restricted to 50mph on two lane A roads, physically capable of doing 60mph, do I stop at 50 when others are going at 60? no, not if I think it's safe to go faster.

All I've ever said is take responsibility for yourself, if you get caught stfu and pay the fine, if you kill someone, stfu and do the time (ooh it rhymes). Don't whine about money grabbing governments, they'd get no money if folk didn't choose to break the law.
 
I always find the braking distance at various speeds a bit of a joke to be honest.

My reason for saying that is that most people do not know what an actual distance is.

I brought this up at my speed awareness course and everybody gave a different length for the room we were in. The bloke running the course wouldn't allow me measure it though.
 
and i am a real anorach when it comews to sticking to speed limits.
amazing the risks people will take to get past you cos you ON the speed limit.
Particularly when your driving a bloody great lorry that they cant see beyond.
Had one on a 40MPH single carriageway section of the A46 in Notts teararse past me a few days ago.
Almost hit the police car infront of me.
Who promptly pulled him over with a burst of blue lights.
Bwahahahaha
 
inaneredstripe said:
and i am a real anorach when it comews to sticking to speed limits.
amazing the risks people will take to get past you cos you ON the speed limit.
Click to expand...

Agree with you there... if your doing the limit ill normally behave... i do however get annoyed with people who do 20 in 30 limits... and so on and so on...

Then look at you like your a madman when u overtake...

Anyway back on topic... I flash, but if someone is blatently doing 80 in a 40 or something, i may "forget" to flash them...

exceeding the limit by a few mph is one thing, by a lot is another!
 
People going to slow are just as (if not, more) dangerous as speeding drivers. Local road to me today, 60mph but doing 40mph!

Going back to the story, we are led to believe that speed cameras are not that, they are safety cameras looking to highlight dangerous areas of road. All this guy was doing was warning drivers it was a dangerous stretch - hence the cops being there. WHy cant the police just be honest, and say its an easy way to raise money and get convictions, rather than catch proper criminals!
 
srichards said:
It's not illegal to flash someone to warn of a speed trap unless that person was speeding and provably so. That is what a similar case said when they tried to do someone else for it. If speed traps are there to make people slow down why are people being prosecuted for warning people to slow down?! Utter hypocrisy. Can only be annoyed at losing their £60.
Click to expand...

It is illegal unless it has changed since I used to be a motorcycle instructor. Flashing your headlights means the same as sounding your horn, namely that you feel that another road user may not have seen you and you are concerned that an accident make occur as a result.

Your comment about if you are hit at 29 MPH it is much worse than not being hit at all is absolutely spot on and probably the best piece of common sense on this thread. :thumbs:

These days we are all so convinced that our cars are Euro NCAP 56 rated and we will survive the accident that the onus on avoiding one by driving properly has gone.
 
Last edited:
I will put my hand up to speeding once.

A personal hate of mine are idiots that speed up when they are being overtaken.

I was exiting a 30 limit single carriageway onto a 40 limit dual carriageway and the indecisive women in front was very slow in pulling forward and then went over to the inside lane but continued to accelerate.

At first I was determined to pass her up to 40Mph but she continued accelerating just to prevent me from doing so. O.K. I thought, I'll have some fun and gradually took the speed up to 50plus. She was so detirmined to make sure Ididn't get in front of her. Then, just as we were about 100yds from tne national speed limit area, I hit my brakes. Nothing behind me and she was on the inside.

Brought my speed down to 40Mph while she sped off at 50plus - Straight through the speed camera.:):):).

Nasty, I know but very satisfying.

Driving can be such fun.
 
Last edited:
I don't flash. Never occurred to me if I'm honest.

I've had people flash me and only realised half a mile later (after I'd looked at them like they were mental) that they may have been warning me about a speed trap. But since I generally stay below the limit I'm not that bothered.

I'm a funny b****r when it comes to speeding. I like to drive fast but I don't like doing it when there are people about who are pretty much guaranteed to get in the way - which is most of the time.

(Favourite phrase - Oh FFS why are you braking, that's not even worthy of being called a corner!)
 
I flash, I also speed on occasions, so if I get caught it's my fault.

Oh, I drive 150mph convertible and harm the environment every time I start it.
 
cambsno said:
I always flash, and was flashed myself the other day. The penalties for going a few miles an hour over the limit are crazy, when you look at what some people get away with not just for dangerous driving but for things like carrying a knife.

Speed (takling 10-15mph) over the limit is not a major factor in most accidents. The majority are bad driving and not driving to the conditions/paying attention.
Click to expand...

:thumbs:
 
mj4456 said:
I flash, I also speed on occasions, so if I get caught it's my fault.

Oh, I drive 150mph convertible and harm the environment every time I start it.
Click to expand...

Depends on the mileage you do. Quite often this type of car is used for weekend trips rather than the daily slog to the office. It's the drivers who do huge mileages that are the ones harming the environment.
 
i'm sure something like 90% of people drive a few miles above the speed limit. i'll flash them. of course if some guy is going 50 in a busy 30 i won't, and will laugh at him as he gets stopped.

having said all this i haven't seen a speed trap in years :)
 
smugor said:
having said all this i haven't seen a speed trap in years :)
Click to expand...

You should try driving from Glasgow to Sunderland!!! :lol: That A69 is horrible and a lot of them seem to be placed at long straight locations where you will overtake slower vehicles after a long stretch of twisty roads. :nono:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top