Blinkered parking!

[captain nemo1701]

The CPS have a 25 metre threshold policy before they'll prosecute for driving other than on a highway or road (else 2/3 of the Country would be in Court), so your chum must've really gone for it.

Thanks for the info - interesting. What cheeses me off about the blokes in the photo is that they clearly think they are avoiding breaking the law by not parking on the double yellow lines but assume it's OK to use the pavement

 

[Drago]

Cars on the pavement should be subject to immediate sledgehammer attack by Ukranian ex spetznaz soldiers. It's fast becoming my 'grumpy old man' topic.

 

[Blue Hills]

You may be cheered to know that I saw a car parked on a pavement (broad pavement, low kerb, one of those restricted traffic/semi pedstrianisedareas) get a ticket in Preston the other day. I'd lay a bet that the owner returned to the car pleading I was only gone 5 mins/was popping nto a fast food place/there was no double yellow. Tough.Knew what s/he was doing for sure

 

[Spinney]

Cars on the pavement should be subject to immediate sledgehammer attack by Ukranian ex spetznaz soldiers. It's fast becoming my 'grumpy old man' topic.

You've only got one??

 

[snorri]

I'm a little worried about my present mental state.



I've Liked two posts from Drago this week, and it's still only Thursday..

 

[KnackeredBike]

Cars on the pavement should be subject to immediate sledgehammer attack by Ukranian ex spetznaz soldiers. It's fast becoming my 'grumpy old man' topic.

Somebody posted on Pepipoo that they did not understand why the police had ticketed them for unnecessary obstruction. Many seem to think it is only obstruction if you are obstructing a car.

 

[Drago]

What a dweezil. Why didn't the eejut just park it neatly at the kerbside?

 

[snorri]

Does anyone carry a jumbo size felt pen for the day when driving and parking just gets too much?

 

[mjr]

What a dweezil. Why didn't the eejut just park it neatly at the kerbside?

I wonder if the long centre line indicates they've parked close to a sharp bend or junction. I've seen people do that near junctions, feeling that they'd be an obstruction if fully on the carriageway in such a location. Of course, the answer is to park further from the hazard, not cause an extra hazard for people walking or using wheelchairs.

 

[Drago]

Here's my manifesto:

1. Make illegal parking a points offence.

2. Lower the threshold for losing your licence to 3 points.

Job done.

Doubtless the Daily Mail legions will whittle and bleat, and claim that's unreasonable, but I've been driving over 30 years and never acquired a parking ticket, never had a point on my licence, so it can't be that difficult.

 

[mjr]

I'd take a more bleedin heart liberal approach and suspend their licences for the same number of days as the points they have, with no exceptions. Even if there's legitimate reasons not to take the licences off 62-pointers (which I doubt), it'll make each offence increasingly painful.

I do know someone who got a very debatable 3 points but didn't get any more yet, many years later, and those have expired. So I'd be very reluctant to revoke at 3 points, as the system isn't infallible. There's moire argument for making the 6 point limit permanent and not only the first two years or whatever it is.

 

[Drago]

Nah, make it 3 points. That'll really distil peoples thinking.

It'll stop people treating speed limits as a target, parking like Dilbert, playing with their phones, and those that are too dense to learn will be off the road immediately they're caught, this making the roads a safer place.

 

[mjr]

I think that's putting too much power in the hands of the police if people can lose their licence for things like being too slow to return to the left lane after overtaking. Sorry @Drago - I know you were infallible but not all your colleagues are.

 

[mjr]

And do people get points for parking like Dilbert anyway? Like the ones above?

 

[Drago]

That's ok, no need to apologise . You and I are grown ups and can discuss differing views without coming to blows.

The integrity of the police is a can of worms, a meaty topic in its own right. But why should offenders have a bit of leeway when accruing points because some coppers might be unreliable? Why then 6 points? Surely there could be 2 unreliable coppers out there, so best make it 9 points... and so on.

Lets make it 3 points in the utopian cycling wonderland which would thrive under my premiership, but we'll set the evidential bar high. High quality photos of offences are now easy to acquire. Ditto videos, with body worn video being rolled out. Speeding offences have always had a high technical evidence threshold, so no problem there.

Making the punishment wooly doesn't protect the public from dodgy, incompetent or thick coppers, it simply gives offenders everywhere to pinch and inch, and they will.