Dorset Police ClampDown

[gaz]

then you will be aware that if the road has street lights and no ( not legally required) repeaters as set down in the TSRGD it will be a 30mph zone . also in section 36 of RTA 1988 if you would like to read it.



and you made me start again GIT

I'm aware of section 36. But without a speedo on my bicycle, how will i know if i'm breaking the speed limit?

 

[As Easy As Riding A Bike]

Street lights are not signs.

 

[ComedyPilot]

The only people who notice, and consequently whine about 'clamp-downs' are people that are 'caught out'

Not enough clamp-downs IMO

 

[mgarl10024]

The motor vehicle speed limit doesn't apply to cycles.

It doesn't stop it being great fun to race past those flashing "slow down" signs and cheer if you manage to set them off!

 

[mgarl10024]

I hate cars parked on the pavement. Apparently it is now not a problem unless it blocks the path enough that a pedestrian can't get by. It used to be that the cars were just parked with 2 wheels on the pavement, now because they got away with that it is now the whole of the car/van/etc.

Sorry if I've mentioned this before Summerdays, but there's been a lot of discussion around North East Bristol about this very thing. The Polices response was that they need to be pragmatic - the roads around here weren't designed for the number of cars on them and they openly admit that if everyone parked 'in the roads' (i.e. no wheels on the pavement) that the roads would be blocked. They are currently investigating a scheme (I think trialled in London) where a white line is painted along the pavement, at a distance away from the wall to allow a pushchair to get through. A motorist can park upto this line, but an inch over and they'll book you. Of course, this scheme also relies on households keeping shrubs etc. cut back and not overhanging. I've not heard anything recently, but it was discussed at a community meeting about 9mths ago.

 

[subaqua]

The only people who notice, and consequently whine about 'clamp-downs' are people that are 'caught out'

Not enough clamp-downs IMO

+1

fully legal and point free for many years. the points i did get were deserved and i didn't bleat like sooo many do when they get caught.

i wasn't going to post again but its like watching a building on fire , you just can't stop

but you all keep on with the cyclists are holier than thou attitude and I will try and do my bit to show other road users we aren't.

 

[turnout]

but you all keep on with the cyclists are holier than thou attitude and I will try and do my bit to show other road users we aren't.

Nobody's declared war on motorists, nobody's acting holier than thou.

 

[Paul.G.]

At least the Dorset Police are actually doing something, unlike Thames Valley Police who are just a bunch of useless Muppets, swear to god they are only in it for the pension.

What a waste of tax payers money these muppets are, no kidding you can drive any old banger around here, no need for headlights, drive as fast as you like and I guarantee not much chance of getting caught by these shirkers!

Only time you see a Police car round here is when it's parked outside the take-away

Muppets!

 

[mgarl10024]

I can't agree with you.

Wow! That's quite harsh. One comment on here and you disagree with the principle of my existence

The rules are quite clear: we all know them. There's really no possible excuse for breaking a speed limit - but the points system and society's prevailing "gamesmanship" attitude leads us to feel that somehow we're being treated unfairly if we break the rules and are caught.

I'm just floating the idea that drivers are not robots and that occasionally mistakes are made. I've known a number of drivers who are normally very good, patient, courteous drivers, who have accidentally crept over the limit by just enough to get caught. I've also seen people flying down 30mph roads at insane speeds.
Personally, I'd advise discretion and being pragmatic. I'd suggest making the limit at which people are caught higher to allow further for human inaccuracy, and making the punishments for breaking the new higher limit (say 50mph in a 30mph) much sterner.

The points system is crazy in my view. What other offences should we introduce it for? Could I be allowed to point my loaded shotgun at you in a public place three or four times without my certificate being revoked? I don't think so. But that's what happens with motor vehicles - equally dangerous devices. You're allowed to demonstrate that not only can you not be trusted to use it responsibly and in accordance with the rules three or four times, but that you're stupid and unobservant enough to get caught three or four times, before any sanction is taken against you. How can that be right?

If a famous football player gets a £60 fine, how can that possibly hurt him? The fine for a football player who earns my annual salary every week has to be more than it might be for me.

Let's assume for the moment that I'm less wealthy than you. It doesn't mean I haven't made decisions every bit as good as yours, or that I haven't worked just as hard. Perhaps I've chosen a career which takes just as much skill or knowledge as yours, but doesn't pay as well - maybe I'm a firefighter or a nurse. So why should I pay a larger proportion of my income than you in a fine if I break the rules?

I don't think there is anything wrong in fining wealthy people more, it wouldn't be unfair if the fine was standardised as a % of income.

You both make some fair points there. I guess I was thinking more about societies' scroungers getting a lesser fine than a hardworking person just because their income happens to be lower.
My new suggestion would be to scrap the fines altogether. Instead, have a points system, but as you suggest, not one where you are not allowed 3-4 incidents and where things are forgotten after a few years.
Perhaps 2 cases of speeding in a 10 year window leads to license disqualification, and driving without a license is an instant prison sentence.
To me, that seems the fairest system. No money involved, no issues of what is "fair" as everyone is treated the same.

 

[gaz]

As i said, the motorists can freely break the laws on the road and constantly get away with it because the amount of traffic cops is minimal.
So you may well be points free, all that means is you haven't been caught

 

[turnout]

The Polices response was that they need to be pragmatic - the roads around here weren't designed for the number of cars on them and they openly admit that if everyone parked 'in the roads' (i.e. no wheels on the pavement) that the roads would be blocked.

That's the cops offering excuses for people who break the law. If I cycled on the pavement and said in mitigation it's too dangerous on the roads I'd still get nicked. (I don't cycle on pavements).

Very silly.

 

[Paul.G.]

To see just how pathetic Thames Valley plod are, watch "Police camera action" next time it's on TV.

Just watch how the police suck-up to motorists when they stop them, its all "Mate this and mate that" and all too nicey nicey, its almost like they are apologising for actually stopping them - Pathetic!!

Then try ringing them to come out to actually do something about rural speeding, it's a pointless waste of a phone call - wasters, there worse than the crims!

 

[summerdays]

Sorry if I've mentioned this before Summerdays, but there's been a lot of discussion around North East Bristol about this very thing. The Polices response was that they need to be pragmatic - the roads around here weren't designed for the number of cars on them and they openly admit that if everyone parked 'in the roads' (i.e. no wheels on the pavement) that the roads would be blocked. They are currently investigating a scheme (I think trialled in London) where a white line is painted along the pavement, at a distance away from the wall to allow a pushchair to get through. A motorist can park upto this line, but an inch over and they'll book you. Of course, this scheme also relies on households keeping shrubs etc. cut back and not overhanging. I've not heard anything recently, but it was discussed at a community meeting about 9mths ago.

No I haven't heard of that ... but the distance would need to be the width required for either a double buggy or a mobility scooter.

but you all keep on with the cyclists are holier than thou attitude and I will try and do my bit to show other road users we aren't.

I don't have a problem with the clamp down being across the board for both cyclists and motorists.

 

[subaqua]

As i said, the motorists can freely break the laws on the road and constantly get away with it because the amount of traffic cops is minimal.
So you may well be points free, all that means is you haven't been caught

no, it means i drive within the laws of the country.

 

[summerdays]

That's the cops offering excuses for people who break the law. If I cycled on the pavement and said in mitigation it's too dangerous on the roads I'd still get nicked. (I don't cycle on pavements).

Very silly.

Actually that is the one defense you could try and use ... however if you are cycling on the pavements in a dangerous manner then I wouldn't expect them to let you get away with it.