-Tom- wrote: βThu Apr 20, 2017 9:23 am
petach wrote: βThu Apr 20, 2017 8:58 am
mmm-five wrote: βWed Apr 19, 2017 9:08 pm
ACPO doesn't exist anymore (nor do the guidelines).
It was replaced by the NPCC in 2015 after the Parker Review gave ACPO a drubbing (e.g. unaccountable, disregard for their own guidelines, lack of transparency, fraud, etc.).
Don't commit a 'crime' and you won't have to take the punishment - after all, none of our speedos under-read, so we can't really use the excuse that we didn't know we were driving over the limit
In defence of the above poster, most people choose which laws apply to them rigidly and those which they find socially acceptable to break just a little bit. Speeding is one of them. The law is explicit in respect of theft, burglary, rape, assault etc. There is no difference with road traffic offences. If you speed.....even just a tiny bit.....there is no excuse. If you are caught cough up and get on with it. I have done it 3 times over the years....and not by a huge margin at all. More fool me. I have no problem with speed cameras....hand held or static. Now, as to whether the police will come out in force to catch those doing .000001 mph over the limit? Don't bet on it. They are all under incredible financial strain and the income they might gain from enforcement is not going to touch it. The police are having to sell off part of their estate (i.e. close down police stations and sell them off to Burger King or MacDonalds etc) to reduce costs in the face of these cuts. Yep, like everyone else they are having to fight leaner and fitter....more bangs for less buck just like the NHS and local government. In fact....things are so bad that the Met Police (in the face of a decline of applicants for a detective role) is allowing PCSO/Specials or whatever they are called these days....to apply to be a detective directly. Probationers will be able to do the same as well.
I have had to knock on doors and ruin the lives (FOR EVER) of the people answering when I have had to impart the worst news (murder AND RTA's) I remember each with a clarity that it seems like only yesterday.
Fair points. But I can't accept 81 on a motorway as a risk; the punishment for it is so out of context. The long old argument I know, but if you are going reduce leeway and increase fines, then motorway speeds should be increased. Instead we are lowering them. totally bonkers. Modern cars almost idle at 70
Yup, agree regarding people choosing which laws to break, however as I said, I really CAN see PCSO's and the like moved away from "other" traffic duties, and sent out with their newly acquired laser guns..
Also, again as stated, why not increase the speed limit on motorways, which are already the safest roads we have, accounting for the lowest proportion of accidents and injuries, to 80 or 90, and rigidly enforce THAT limit. At the end of the day, people who are comfortable doing 50, 60 or 70 all day won't suddenly increase to 90, BUT those that like to make "good progress" when appropriate, will be able to do so and improve the traffic flow behind them.
Just my thoughts, oh and yes, in my quest for a new (to me) X5 40d, I believe that at 100mph in 8th, it's doing something like 2,200 rpm, equating to about 1,500 rpm at 70, basically only twice it's idling speed..
Mike