729 speeding drivers caught by North Yorkshire Police

Inspector Dave Brown

Inspector Dave Brown

First published in News York Press: Photograph of the Author by

FIGURES released by North Yorkshire Police have shown 729 speeding tickets were handed out by officers last month in the county.

The figures showed 365 of the tickets were handed out during a week-long study by the European Traffic Police Network TISPOL, which covered 23 European countries.

Inspector Dave Brown, of North Yorkshire Police’s strategic roads policing unit, said: “The operation sends a clear message that not only the UK, but Europe as a whole is united in the common goal of saving lives on our roads and making them safe for everyone.

“It’s staggering that despite widespread publicity of the dangers of speeding, people continue to break the law and put lives in danger.”

The TISPOL research showed 8,465 speeding tickets had been given to UK drivers in the same seven-day period.

The North Yorkshire Police figures for April included 310 speeding tickets handed out to drivers exceeding the speed limit on a 30mph road, 196 drivers caught exceeding the 70mph speed limit on a dual carriageway, and 30 lorry drivers exceeding the speed limit.

The figures come weeks after proposals by North Yorkshire County Council to install speed cameras at 28 locations on roads in York and North Yorkshire as part of a 12-month trial scheme.

The council said the cost of the pilot scheme would be £250,000, which would come from the Department of Transport’s Road Safety Grant. City of York Council and North Yorkshire Police supported the suggestion, and claimed cameras installed at speeding and accident hotspots could save the taxpayer up to £10.35 million.

Comments (41)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

8:14am Thu 27 May 10

TooRelaxed says...

Blah blah beleagured motorist blah blah road tax blah blah evil cyclists blah blah etc
Blah blah beleagured motorist blah blah road tax blah blah evil cyclists blah blah etc TooRelaxed
  • Score: 0

8:29am Thu 27 May 10

pedalling paul says...

TooRelaxed wrote:
Blah blah beleagured motorist blah blah road tax blah blah evil cyclists blah blah etc
Fine until one of your own relatives is laid in a hospital bed or on a mortuary slab, as a result of someone driving at inappropriate or illegal speed. Then you might change your tune.
[quote][p][bold]TooRelaxed[/bold] wrote: Blah blah beleagured motorist blah blah road tax blah blah evil cyclists blah blah etc[/p][/quote]Fine until one of your own relatives is laid in a hospital bed or on a mortuary slab, as a result of someone driving at inappropriate or illegal speed. Then you might change your tune. pedalling paul
  • Score: 0

8:49am Thu 27 May 10

Victor Smythe says...

pedalling paul wrote:
TooRelaxed wrote:
Blah blah beleagured motorist blah blah road tax blah blah evil cyclists blah blah etc
Fine until one of your own relatives is laid in a hospital bed or on a mortuary slab, as a result of someone driving at inappropriate or illegal speed. Then you might change your tune.
Paul, a typical generic statement from you to support this pathetic assault by the police on motorists.

What we need is analysis of the accidents, especially those causing serious injury. I think we will find that most serious accidents are caused where drivers aren't driving at speeds suitable to the conditions (eg wet roads or heavy traffic) or where someone is driving recklessly (eg the case a couple of days ago of 140mph?).
Where motorists are driving a speed suitable to the conditions a few miles an hour over the speed limit nicking them will not make any difference to road safety as they are not the ones causing the serious accidents. It is those driving like idiots who do the damage.

This whole are subject needs rigorous analysis rather than the trite supercial baseless rubbish the police marketing department issue to the media.


To York Press - why don't you ask NYP for a breakdown of all the accidents where someone has been injured for say the last year and the causes of the accident?

To NYP - why don't you come clean with the real facts?


Stands back waits for the goody2shoes rants
[quote][p][bold]pedalling paul [/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]TooRelaxed[/bold] wrote: Blah blah beleagured motorist blah blah road tax blah blah evil cyclists blah blah etc[/p][/quote]Fine until one of your own relatives is laid in a hospital bed or on a mortuary slab, as a result of someone driving at inappropriate or illegal speed. Then you might change your tune.[/p][/quote]Paul, a typical generic statement from you to support this pathetic assault by the police on motorists. What we need is analysis of the accidents, especially those causing serious injury. I think we will find that most serious accidents are caused where drivers aren't driving at speeds suitable to the conditions (eg wet roads or heavy traffic) or where someone is driving recklessly (eg the case a couple of days ago of 140mph?). Where motorists are driving a speed suitable to the conditions a few miles an hour over the speed limit nicking them will not make any difference to road safety as they are not the ones causing the serious accidents. It is those driving like idiots who do the damage. This whole are subject needs rigorous analysis rather than the trite supercial baseless rubbish the police marketing department issue to the media. To York Press - why don't you ask NYP for a breakdown of all the accidents where someone has been injured for say the last year and the causes of the accident? To NYP - why don't you come clean with the real facts? Stands back waits for the goody2shoes rants Victor Smythe
  • Score: 0

9:02am Thu 27 May 10

pedalling paul says...

You will note my inclusion of the word "inappropriate" This reasons that include the fact that driving below the legal limit, but at a speed that is unsafe for current road conditions eg fog or snow, can also cause collisions.
If you want to drive like a tear a**e, go to Silverstone.
You will note my inclusion of the word "inappropriate" This reasons that include the fact that driving below the legal limit, but at a speed that is unsafe for current road conditions eg fog or snow, can also cause collisions. If you want to drive like a tear a**e, go to Silverstone. pedalling paul
  • Score: 0

9:13am Thu 27 May 10

redr says...

Well done to the police. Get the selfish risk takers off the road. Thank you.

Paul I believe that TooRelaxed from happy town was having a dig at the moaning motorist. Anyhow just think of all the kittens that could be saved.
Well done to the police. Get the selfish risk takers off the road. Thank you. Paul I believe that TooRelaxed from happy town was having a dig at the moaning motorist. Anyhow just think of all the kittens that could be saved. redr
  • Score: 0

9:36am Thu 27 May 10

sent to coventry says...

How about NYP showing the figures of the fools still driving round with a ruddy mobile glued to the side of their head!.
Speeding is of course wrong but certain stretches of roads are mis-leading when the limits change in a short space of time.
The brain dead who flout the mobile ban should be hit harder as well as they are obviously not in full control of their vehicle.
Until drivers get more points or bans due to this annoying habit they will feel free to carry on.
How about NYP showing the figures of the fools still driving round with a ruddy mobile glued to the side of their head!. Speeding is of course wrong but certain stretches of roads are mis-leading when the limits change in a short space of time. The brain dead who flout the mobile ban should be hit harder as well as they are obviously not in full control of their vehicle. Until drivers get more points or bans due to this annoying habit they will feel free to carry on. sent to coventry
  • Score: 0

9:48am Thu 27 May 10

anonyork says...

sent to coventry, I agree with your comments about drivers using phones not being in full control but what about smokers! How many times do you see someone trying to steer with their knees whilst holding a cigarette in one hand and lighter in the other! Then they drive with one hand, holding the cigarette in the other and resting that hand on the steering wheel! If they drop the cigarette in the car they risk setting fire to the car. It should be treated the same as using a phone or eating behind the wheel! At least if I drop my sandwich I can just leave it and get on with driving the car!
sent to coventry, I agree with your comments about drivers using phones not being in full control but what about smokers! How many times do you see someone trying to steer with their knees whilst holding a cigarette in one hand and lighter in the other! Then they drive with one hand, holding the cigarette in the other and resting that hand on the steering wheel! If they drop the cigarette in the car they risk setting fire to the car. It should be treated the same as using a phone or eating behind the wheel! At least if I drop my sandwich I can just leave it and get on with driving the car! anonyork
  • Score: 0

10:01am Thu 27 May 10

hifive says...

Victor Smythe wrote:
pedalling paul wrote:
TooRelaxed wrote: Blah blah beleagured motorist blah blah road tax blah blah evil cyclists blah blah etc
Fine until one of your own relatives is laid in a hospital bed or on a mortuary slab, as a result of someone driving at inappropriate or illegal speed. Then you might change your tune.
Paul, a typical generic statement from you to support this pathetic assault by the police on motorists. What we need is analysis of the accidents, especially those causing serious injury. I think we will find that most serious accidents are caused where drivers aren't driving at speeds suitable to the conditions (eg wet roads or heavy traffic) or where someone is driving recklessly (eg the case a couple of days ago of 140mph?). Where motorists are driving a speed suitable to the conditions a few miles an hour over the speed limit nicking them will not make any difference to road safety as they are not the ones causing the serious accidents. It is those driving like idiots who do the damage. This whole are subject needs rigorous analysis rather than the trite supercial baseless rubbish the police marketing department issue to the media. To York Press - why don't you ask NYP for a breakdown of all the accidents where someone has been injured for say the last year and the causes of the accident? To NYP - why don't you come clean with the real facts? Stands back waits for the goody2shoes rants
Most people manage to drive within the limit - what makes you so special? Stop pratting about with statistics, put your dummy back in and abide by the law of the road as we all have to.
[quote][p][bold]Victor Smythe[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]pedalling paul [/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]TooRelaxed[/bold] wrote: Blah blah beleagured motorist blah blah road tax blah blah evil cyclists blah blah etc[/p][/quote]Fine until one of your own relatives is laid in a hospital bed or on a mortuary slab, as a result of someone driving at inappropriate or illegal speed. Then you might change your tune.[/p][/quote]Paul, a typical generic statement from you to support this pathetic assault by the police on motorists. What we need is analysis of the accidents, especially those causing serious injury. I think we will find that most serious accidents are caused where drivers aren't driving at speeds suitable to the conditions (eg wet roads or heavy traffic) or where someone is driving recklessly (eg the case a couple of days ago of 140mph?). Where motorists are driving a speed suitable to the conditions a few miles an hour over the speed limit nicking them will not make any difference to road safety as they are not the ones causing the serious accidents. It is those driving like idiots who do the damage. This whole are subject needs rigorous analysis rather than the trite supercial baseless rubbish the police marketing department issue to the media. To York Press - why don't you ask NYP for a breakdown of all the accidents where someone has been injured for say the last year and the causes of the accident? To NYP - why don't you come clean with the real facts? Stands back waits for the goody2shoes rants[/p][/quote]Most people manage to drive within the limit - what makes you so special? Stop pratting about with statistics, put your dummy back in and abide by the law of the road as we all have to. hifive
  • Score: 0

10:03am Thu 27 May 10

Garrowby Turnoff says...

Cars should be fitted with a remote controlled governor that is triggered automatically and irreversibly by a General Operating Device (GOD) that should be set to 29 mph. Every vehicle should be fitted with a black-box flight recorder and, in order to activate the vehicle it should have to pass stringent checks on speeding, road worthiness, insurance, road tax, and emission levels. Passing a driver’s breath test for alcohol are needed to start the car.
.
The information from this black-box is transmitted to a GOD sensor sited on every road and if it doesn't comply the immobilisers are activated. If tampered with, the black-box should emit a 10 thousand volt electrical surge up the control pedals to electrocute the driver. Next, GOD's traffic disciples should visit the home of the dead driver and shop lift goods to the value of £10,000 for distribution amongst cyclists, Greeks, Italians and public transport users.
.
Oh! And, random castration for 4x4 drivers with no mud on their wheels who won't pull over when passing my 2x4 in Millington Pastures.
.
That's about it then...
Cars should be fitted with a remote controlled governor that is triggered automatically and irreversibly by a General Operating Device (GOD) that should be set to 29 mph. Every vehicle should be fitted with a black-box flight recorder and, in order to activate the vehicle it should have to pass stringent checks on speeding, road worthiness, insurance, road tax, and emission levels. Passing a driver’s breath test for alcohol are needed to start the car. . The information from this black-box is transmitted to a GOD sensor sited on every road and if it doesn't comply the immobilisers are activated. If tampered with, the black-box should emit a 10 thousand volt electrical surge up the control pedals to electrocute the driver. Next, GOD's traffic disciples should visit the home of the dead driver and shop lift goods to the value of £10,000 for distribution amongst cyclists, Greeks, Italians and public transport users. . Oh! And, random castration for 4x4 drivers with no mud on their wheels who won't pull over when passing my 2x4 in Millington Pastures. . That's about it then... Garrowby Turnoff
  • Score: 0

10:12am Thu 27 May 10

markymmark says...

Agree with sent to coventry -also whats the point in fining people less than what it would cost them to comply with the law eg: £100 fine for no insurance !
The courts seem to pitch the fines just low enough to not stop certain people from committing the offence.

Should be - using a mobile 2 month ban and fine.
No insurance - £1000 fine and 12 month ban.Vehicle crushed.
Speeding - Should be at Police discretion based on conditions at the time if the offence is not in a built up area
Its not going to happen though because fines from traffic offences are a nice little earner.

Just to carry on with the rant -

During a clamp down on Motorcycle safety recently out of those stopped the offences were noisy exhaust pipes and too small numberplates !

Like I said - Its not about safety its about money !
Agree with sent to coventry -also whats the point in fining people less than what it would cost them to comply with the law eg: £100 fine for no insurance ! The courts seem to pitch the fines just low enough to not stop certain people from committing the offence. Should be - using a mobile 2 month ban and fine. No insurance - £1000 fine and 12 month ban.Vehicle crushed. Speeding - Should be at Police discretion based on conditions at the time if the offence is not in a built up area Its not going to happen though because fines from traffic offences are a nice little earner. Just to carry on with the rant - During a clamp down on Motorcycle safety recently out of those stopped the offences were noisy exhaust pipes and too small numberplates ! Like I said - Its not about safety its about money ! markymmark
  • Score: 0

11:04am Thu 27 May 10

again says...

Why not pitch into the motorcyclists with noisy exhaust pipes and tiny numberplates? The very ones who terrorise the rest of us and thumb their noses at any law that does not suit them. Superbike racing is a great spectacle, but there are too many who use the roads as race tracks and the small number plates are to avoid being caught.
Why not pitch into the motorcyclists with noisy exhaust pipes and tiny numberplates? The very ones who terrorise the rest of us and thumb their noses at any law that does not suit them. Superbike racing is a great spectacle, but there are too many who use the roads as race tracks and the small number plates are to avoid being caught. again
  • Score: 0

11:06am Thu 27 May 10

PKH says...

markymmark wrote:
Agree with sent to coventry -also whats the point in fining people less than what it would cost them to comply with the law eg: £100 fine for no insurance ! The courts seem to pitch the fines just low enough to not stop certain people from committing the offence. Should be - using a mobile 2 month ban and fine. No insurance - £1000 fine and 12 month ban.Vehicle crushed. Speeding - Should be at Police discretion based on conditions at the time if the offence is not in a built up area Its not going to happen though because fines from traffic offences are a nice little earner. Just to carry on with the rant - During a clamp down on Motorcycle safety recently out of those stopped the offences were noisy exhaust pipes and too small numberplates ! Like I said - Its not about safety its about money !
Re Motorcycles noisy exhausts is an anti-social noise nuisance, and small number plates makes it difficult for them to be read if are riding inconsiderately or excesive speed. The inference of small number plates is you wish to evade being caught when breaking the law.
[quote][p][bold]markymmark[/bold] wrote: Agree with sent to coventry -also whats the point in fining people less than what it would cost them to comply with the law eg: £100 fine for no insurance ! The courts seem to pitch the fines just low enough to not stop certain people from committing the offence. Should be - using a mobile 2 month ban and fine. No insurance - £1000 fine and 12 month ban.Vehicle crushed. Speeding - Should be at Police discretion based on conditions at the time if the offence is not in a built up area Its not going to happen though because fines from traffic offences are a nice little earner. Just to carry on with the rant - During a clamp down on Motorcycle safety recently out of those stopped the offences were noisy exhaust pipes and too small numberplates ! Like I said - Its not about safety its about money ![/p][/quote]Re Motorcycles noisy exhausts is an anti-social noise nuisance, and small number plates makes it difficult for them to be read if are riding inconsiderately or excesive speed. The inference of small number plates is you wish to evade being caught when breaking the law. PKH
  • Score: 0

11:16am Thu 27 May 10

Victor Smythe says...

hifive wrote:
Victor Smythe wrote:
pedalling paul wrote:
TooRelaxed wrote: Blah blah beleagured motorist blah blah road tax blah blah evil cyclists blah blah etc
Fine until one of your own relatives is laid in a hospital bed or on a mortuary slab, as a result of someone driving at inappropriate or illegal speed. Then you might change your tune.
Paul, a typical generic statement from you to support this pathetic assault by the police on motorists. What we need is analysis of the accidents, especially those causing serious injury. I think we will find that most serious accidents are caused where drivers aren't driving at speeds suitable to the conditions (eg wet roads or heavy traffic) or where someone is driving recklessly (eg the case a couple of days ago of 140mph?). Where motorists are driving a speed suitable to the conditions a few miles an hour over the speed limit nicking them will not make any difference to road safety as they are not the ones causing the serious accidents. It is those driving like idiots who do the damage. This whole are subject needs rigorous analysis rather than the trite supercial baseless rubbish the police marketing department issue to the media. To York Press - why don't you ask NYP for a breakdown of all the accidents where someone has been injured for say the last year and the causes of the accident? To NYP - why don't you come clean with the real facts? Stands back waits for the goody2shoes rants
Most people manage to drive within the limit - what makes you so special? Stop pratting about with statistics, put your dummy back in and abide by the law of the road as we all have to.
Stands back waits for the goody2shoes rants - one point proven correct already!!
[quote][p][bold]hifive[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Victor Smythe[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]pedalling paul [/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]TooRelaxed[/bold] wrote: Blah blah beleagured motorist blah blah road tax blah blah evil cyclists blah blah etc[/p][/quote]Fine until one of your own relatives is laid in a hospital bed or on a mortuary slab, as a result of someone driving at inappropriate or illegal speed. Then you might change your tune.[/p][/quote]Paul, a typical generic statement from you to support this pathetic assault by the police on motorists. What we need is analysis of the accidents, especially those causing serious injury. I think we will find that most serious accidents are caused where drivers aren't driving at speeds suitable to the conditions (eg wet roads or heavy traffic) or where someone is driving recklessly (eg the case a couple of days ago of 140mph?). Where motorists are driving a speed suitable to the conditions a few miles an hour over the speed limit nicking them will not make any difference to road safety as they are not the ones causing the serious accidents. It is those driving like idiots who do the damage. This whole are subject needs rigorous analysis rather than the trite supercial baseless rubbish the police marketing department issue to the media. To York Press - why don't you ask NYP for a breakdown of all the accidents where someone has been injured for say the last year and the causes of the accident? To NYP - why don't you come clean with the real facts? Stands back waits for the goody2shoes rants[/p][/quote]Most people manage to drive within the limit - what makes you so special? Stop pratting about with statistics, put your dummy back in and abide by the law of the road as we all have to.[/p][/quote]Stands back waits for the goody2shoes rants - one point proven correct already!! Victor Smythe
  • Score: 0

11:31am Thu 27 May 10

Victor Smythe says...

markymmark wrote:
Agree with sent to coventry -also whats the point in fining people less than what it would cost them to comply with the law eg: £100 fine for no insurance !
The courts seem to pitch the fines just low enough to not stop certain people from committing the offence.

Should be - using a mobile 2 month ban and fine.
No insurance - £1000 fine and 12 month ban.Vehicle crushed.
Speeding - Should be at Police discretion based on conditions at the time if the offence is not in a built up area
Its not going to happen though because fines from traffic offences are a nice little earner.

Just to carry on with the rant -

During a clamp down on Motorcycle safety recently out of those stopped the offences were noisy exhaust pipes and too small numberplates !

Like I said - Its not about safety its about money !
Exactly.
[quote][p][bold]markymmark[/bold] wrote: Agree with sent to coventry -also whats the point in fining people less than what it would cost them to comply with the law eg: £100 fine for no insurance ! The courts seem to pitch the fines just low enough to not stop certain people from committing the offence. Should be - using a mobile 2 month ban and fine. No insurance - £1000 fine and 12 month ban.Vehicle crushed. Speeding - Should be at Police discretion based on conditions at the time if the offence is not in a built up area Its not going to happen though because fines from traffic offences are a nice little earner. Just to carry on with the rant - During a clamp down on Motorcycle safety recently out of those stopped the offences were noisy exhaust pipes and too small numberplates ! Like I said - Its not about safety its about money ![/p][/quote]Exactly. Victor Smythe
  • Score: 0

12:02pm Thu 27 May 10

UsernameNotAvailable says...

How about a review of the speed limits - which were knee-jerk reaction numbers plucked out of thin air by politicians 45 years ago, back when cars had hopeless brakes and the driving test was easy? Speed over a set limit DOES NOT kill, only innapropriate speed and dangerous/careless driving. It's a shame that most people are too stupid to judge what's appropriate and so need black-and-white limits. Some of the 50mph limit straight dual carriagways I've seen are ridiculous. Too much obsession with speed limits. For the Government it is ALL about money, not safety. I can't believe some morons still fall for the anti-'speeder' propoganda. I have much more concern for the erratic, inconsiderate and downright bloody dangerous driving I see every day by vehicles driving within the speed limit.

Also the person who mentioned small numberplates on motorcycles pointing to the rider wanting to avoid their reg being seen - rubbish I'm afraid. Most small plates are installed for vanity. Police officers have actually admitted that some smaller than regulation plates (not stupid small though) can be read fine, but the law is black and white, and besides, it's easy money.
How about a review of the speed limits - which were knee-jerk reaction numbers plucked out of thin air by politicians 45 years ago, back when cars had hopeless brakes and the driving test was easy? Speed over a set limit DOES NOT kill, only innapropriate speed and dangerous/careless driving. It's a shame that most people are too stupid to judge what's appropriate and so need black-and-white limits. Some of the 50mph limit straight dual carriagways I've seen are ridiculous. Too much obsession with speed limits. For the Government it is ALL about money, not safety. I can't believe some morons still fall for the anti-'speeder' propoganda. I have much more concern for the erratic, inconsiderate and downright bloody dangerous driving I see every day by vehicles driving within the speed limit. Also the person who mentioned small numberplates on motorcycles pointing to the rider wanting to avoid their reg being seen - rubbish I'm afraid. Most small plates are installed for vanity. Police officers have actually admitted that some smaller than regulation plates (not stupid small though) can be read fine, but the law is black and white, and besides, it's easy money. UsernameNotAvailable
  • Score: 0

12:15pm Thu 27 May 10

hifive says...

Victor Smythe wrote:
hifive wrote:
Victor Smythe wrote:
pedalling paul wrote:
TooRelaxed wrote: Blah blah beleagured motorist blah blah road tax blah blah evil cyclists blah blah etc
Fine until one of your own relatives is laid in a hospital bed or on a mortuary slab, as a result of someone driving at inappropriate or illegal speed. Then you might change your tune.
Paul, a typical generic statement from you to support this pathetic assault by the police on motorists. What we need is analysis of the accidents, especially those causing serious injury. I think we will find that most serious accidents are caused where drivers aren't driving at speeds suitable to the conditions (eg wet roads or heavy traffic) or where someone is driving recklessly (eg the case a couple of days ago of 140mph?). Where motorists are driving a speed suitable to the conditions a few miles an hour over the speed limit nicking them will not make any difference to road safety as they are not the ones causing the serious accidents. It is those driving like idiots who do the damage. This whole are subject needs rigorous analysis rather than the trite supercial baseless rubbish the police marketing department issue to the media. To York Press - why don't you ask NYP for a breakdown of all the accidents where someone has been injured for say the last year and the causes of the accident? To NYP - why don't you come clean with the real facts? Stands back waits for the goody2shoes rants
Most people manage to drive within the limit - what makes you so special? Stop pratting about with statistics, put your dummy back in and abide by the law of the road as we all have to.
Stands back waits for the goody2shoes rants - one point proven correct already!!
You don't sound old enough to drive! If paying attention to speed limits makes me a "goody2shoes" then so be it.
[quote][p][bold]Victor Smythe[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]hifive[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Victor Smythe[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]pedalling paul [/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]TooRelaxed[/bold] wrote: Blah blah beleagured motorist blah blah road tax blah blah evil cyclists blah blah etc[/p][/quote]Fine until one of your own relatives is laid in a hospital bed or on a mortuary slab, as a result of someone driving at inappropriate or illegal speed. Then you might change your tune.[/p][/quote]Paul, a typical generic statement from you to support this pathetic assault by the police on motorists. What we need is analysis of the accidents, especially those causing serious injury. I think we will find that most serious accidents are caused where drivers aren't driving at speeds suitable to the conditions (eg wet roads or heavy traffic) or where someone is driving recklessly (eg the case a couple of days ago of 140mph?). Where motorists are driving a speed suitable to the conditions a few miles an hour over the speed limit nicking them will not make any difference to road safety as they are not the ones causing the serious accidents. It is those driving like idiots who do the damage. This whole are subject needs rigorous analysis rather than the trite supercial baseless rubbish the police marketing department issue to the media. To York Press - why don't you ask NYP for a breakdown of all the accidents where someone has been injured for say the last year and the causes of the accident? To NYP - why don't you come clean with the real facts? Stands back waits for the goody2shoes rants[/p][/quote]Most people manage to drive within the limit - what makes you so special? Stop pratting about with statistics, put your dummy back in and abide by the law of the road as we all have to.[/p][/quote]Stands back waits for the goody2shoes rants - one point proven correct already!![/p][/quote]You don't sound old enough to drive! If paying attention to speed limits makes me a "goody2shoes" then so be it. hifive
  • Score: 0

12:43pm Thu 27 May 10

TooRelaxed says...

pedalling paul wrote:
TooRelaxed wrote:
Blah blah beleagured motorist blah blah road tax blah blah evil cyclists blah blah etc
Fine until one of your own relatives is laid in a hospital bed or on a mortuary slab, as a result of someone driving at inappropriate or illegal speed. Then you might change your tune.
Boy Paul, you really must be the pillock they say you are.
Irony, spoof, satire, skit, mockery, taking the p, call it what you want that's what it was, and it's not the first time you've missed it by a mile.
.
Perhaps if you took your head out of your bum and stopped knee-jerking your platitudes at everyone you'd have less difficulty understanding the real world?
[quote][p][bold]pedalling paul [/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]TooRelaxed[/bold] wrote: Blah blah beleagured motorist blah blah road tax blah blah evil cyclists blah blah etc[/p][/quote]Fine until one of your own relatives is laid in a hospital bed or on a mortuary slab, as a result of someone driving at inappropriate or illegal speed. Then you might change your tune.[/p][/quote]Boy Paul, you really must be the pillock they say you are. Irony, spoof, satire, skit, mockery, taking the p, call it what you want that's what it was, and it's not the first time you've missed it by a mile. . Perhaps if you took your head out of your bum and stopped knee-jerking your platitudes at everyone you'd have less difficulty understanding the real world? TooRelaxed
  • Score: 0

2:02pm Thu 27 May 10

Silver says...

If there's one thing people in York will bicker about it's transport in all forms. From bikes to cars and everything else you'll all bicker about it. Have to say it's getting really boring reading the same viewpoints from the same people. None of you manage to persuade the others of your viewpoints so it just carries on as a vicious cycle (Pedalling Paul will no doubt add that I don't mean cycle but bicycle) Anyone else just bored of this debate?
If there's one thing people in York will bicker about it's transport in all forms. From bikes to cars and everything else you'll all bicker about it. Have to say it's getting really boring reading the same viewpoints from the same people. None of you manage to persuade the others of your viewpoints so it just carries on as a vicious cycle (Pedalling Paul will no doubt add that I don't mean cycle but bicycle) Anyone else just bored of this debate? Silver
  • Score: 0

2:21pm Thu 27 May 10

hifive says...

Silver wrote:
If there's one thing people in York will bicker about it's transport in all forms. From bikes to cars and everything else you'll all bicker about it. Have to say it's getting really boring reading the same viewpoints from the same people. None of you manage to persuade the others of your viewpoints so it just carries on as a vicious cycle (Pedalling Paul will no doubt add that I don't mean cycle but bicycle) Anyone else just bored of this debate?
Yes, and bored of people arguing about the way things ought to be! In the real world, we all just get on with it but there's always a debate on here about how it should work which never has any actual bearing on your drive/ bike ride/ walk home from work. I see it in simple terms - don't exceed the speed limit and you won't get fined.
[quote][p][bold]Silver[/bold] wrote: If there's one thing people in York will bicker about it's transport in all forms. From bikes to cars and everything else you'll all bicker about it. Have to say it's getting really boring reading the same viewpoints from the same people. None of you manage to persuade the others of your viewpoints so it just carries on as a vicious cycle (Pedalling Paul will no doubt add that I don't mean cycle but bicycle) Anyone else just bored of this debate?[/p][/quote]Yes, and bored of people arguing about the way things ought to be! In the real world, we all just get on with it but there's always a debate on here about how it should work which never has any actual bearing on your drive/ bike ride/ walk home from work. I see it in simple terms - don't exceed the speed limit and you won't get fined. hifive
  • Score: 0

2:37pm Thu 27 May 10

AdmiralNN says...

Reading these threads there are some real big egos on here. The standard of comments is getting worse by the story.
Reading these threads there are some real big egos on here. The standard of comments is getting worse by the story. AdmiralNN
  • Score: 0

2:42pm Thu 27 May 10

Victor Smythe says...

hifive wrote:
Silver wrote:
If there's one thing people in York will bicker about it's transport in all forms. From bikes to cars and everything else you'll all bicker about it. Have to say it's getting really boring reading the same viewpoints from the same people. None of you manage to persuade the others of your viewpoints so it just carries on as a vicious cycle (Pedalling Paul will no doubt add that I don't mean cycle but bicycle) Anyone else just bored of this debate?
Yes, and bored of people arguing about the way things ought to be! In the real world, we all just get on with it but there's always a debate on here about how it should work which never has any actual bearing on your drive/ bike ride/ walk home from work. I see it in simple terms - don't exceed the speed limit and you won't get fined.
You seem, just like NYP scared to have facts and analysis - so let's keep on doing what we do. Penalising motorists going slightly faster than they should and doing no harm to anyone, cos it makes money and headlines, whilst the real tragedies continue unabated.
[quote][p][bold]hifive[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Silver[/bold] wrote: If there's one thing people in York will bicker about it's transport in all forms. From bikes to cars and everything else you'll all bicker about it. Have to say it's getting really boring reading the same viewpoints from the same people. None of you manage to persuade the others of your viewpoints so it just carries on as a vicious cycle (Pedalling Paul will no doubt add that I don't mean cycle but bicycle) Anyone else just bored of this debate?[/p][/quote]Yes, and bored of people arguing about the way things ought to be! In the real world, we all just get on with it but there's always a debate on here about how it should work which never has any actual bearing on your drive/ bike ride/ walk home from work. I see it in simple terms - don't exceed the speed limit and you won't get fined.[/p][/quote]You seem, just like NYP scared to have facts and analysis - so let's keep on doing what we do. Penalising motorists going slightly faster than they should and doing no harm to anyone, cos it makes money and headlines, whilst the real tragedies continue unabated. Victor Smythe
  • Score: 0

3:12pm Thu 27 May 10

Mr Udigawa says...

In my view this is most certainly about revenue & not much else. Speed limits should be obeyed, but the best way to do this is through proper policing, which monitors all traffic offences, ie: using a mobile phone while driving, undertaking, speeding, tailgating, drink driving, driving a defective vehicle, ignoring roadmarkings, etc etc. speed cameras only penalise one of the above.
In my view this is most certainly about revenue & not much else. Speed limits should be obeyed, but the best way to do this is through proper policing, which monitors all traffic offences, ie: using a mobile phone while driving, undertaking, speeding, tailgating, drink driving, driving a defective vehicle, ignoring roadmarkings, etc etc. speed cameras only penalise one of the above. Mr Udigawa
  • Score: 0

4:30pm Thu 27 May 10

Mr Udigawa says...

Silver, Hifive & Admiral NN, if it's too boring or lowbrow for you, why bother reading or contrbuting?
Why not leave the rest of us happily having our heated, blinkered debates?
Silver, Hifive & Admiral NN, if it's too boring or lowbrow for you, why bother reading or contrbuting? Why not leave the rest of us happily having our heated, blinkered debates? Mr Udigawa
  • Score: 0

4:45pm Thu 27 May 10

Silver says...

Mr Udigawa wrote:
Silver, Hifive & Admiral NN, if it's too boring or lowbrow for you, why bother reading or contrbuting? Why not leave the rest of us happily having our heated, blinkered debates?
Because it's not the plural of debate, it's the same one thats always been going on. You've not had more then one debate on this subject. If this was a historical event the best equivalent would be the hundred year war. It just goes round and round never stops. And I agree with you that from now on I'm probably not gonna contribute to this singular debate due to it being absolutely pointless. I'm just pointing out that from the 2 years of commenting on this site no one has ever switched sides so why do you bother to debate? you all know what side of the fence you're on. Now can we move on?
[quote][p][bold]Mr Udigawa[/bold] wrote: Silver, Hifive & Admiral NN, if it's too boring or lowbrow for you, why bother reading or contrbuting? Why not leave the rest of us happily having our heated, blinkered debates?[/p][/quote]Because it's not the plural of debate, it's the same one thats always been going on. You've not had more then one debate on this subject. If this was a historical event the best equivalent would be the hundred year war. It just goes round and round never stops. And I agree with you that from now on I'm probably not gonna contribute to this singular debate due to it being absolutely pointless. I'm just pointing out that from the 2 years of commenting on this site no one has ever switched sides so why do you bother to debate? you all know what side of the fence you're on. Now can we move on? Silver
  • Score: 0

4:49pm Thu 27 May 10

Mr Udigawa says...

Silver wrote:
Mr Udigawa wrote: Silver, Hifive & Admiral NN, if it's too boring or lowbrow for you, why bother reading or contrbuting? Why not leave the rest of us happily having our heated, blinkered debates?
Because it's not the plural of debate, it's the same one thats always been going on. You've not had more then one debate on this subject. If this was a historical event the best equivalent would be the hundred year war. It just goes round and round never stops. And I agree with you that from now on I'm probably not gonna contribute to this singular debate due to it being absolutely pointless. I'm just pointing out that from the 2 years of commenting on this site no one has ever switched sides so why do you bother to debate? you all know what side of the fence you're on. Now can we move on?
Did you notice the word "Happily" in my previous post Silver?
Security word: lighten-up
[quote][p][bold]Silver[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Mr Udigawa[/bold] wrote: Silver, Hifive & Admiral NN, if it's too boring or lowbrow for you, why bother reading or contrbuting? Why not leave the rest of us happily having our heated, blinkered debates?[/p][/quote]Because it's not the plural of debate, it's the same one thats always been going on. You've not had more then one debate on this subject. If this was a historical event the best equivalent would be the hundred year war. It just goes round and round never stops. And I agree with you that from now on I'm probably not gonna contribute to this singular debate due to it being absolutely pointless. I'm just pointing out that from the 2 years of commenting on this site no one has ever switched sides so why do you bother to debate? you all know what side of the fence you're on. Now can we move on?[/p][/quote]Did you notice the word "Happily" in my previous post Silver? Security word: lighten-up Mr Udigawa
  • Score: 0

7:28pm Thu 27 May 10

Cold_as_Christmas says...

Back to the issue:
If the Department of Road Safety has £250,000 to blow then why on earth are they not fixing our roads which have been left in a dangerous state since winter?
Like someone said before, it is about collecting money from the motorist, just another con!
Back to the issue: If the Department of Road Safety has £250,000 to blow then why on earth are they not fixing our roads which have been left in a dangerous state since winter? Like someone said before, it is about collecting money from the motorist, just another con! Cold_as_Christmas
  • Score: 0

12:09am Fri 28 May 10

Get-a-grip says...

Of course it's all about extracting money from the motorist. The UK has the safest roads in the developed world, and speed is a factor in a negligible number of accidents as is well known.
Of course it's all about extracting money from the motorist. The UK has the safest roads in the developed world, and speed is a factor in a negligible number of accidents as is well known. Get-a-grip
  • Score: 0

12:48am Fri 28 May 10

King Edward says...

Still a fraction of what they could catch, you could get that no. in one day on Moor Lane, Woodthorpe, and sit at Askham Bar roundabout and you'll get double that on the phone. The odds of getting caught are so slim, people will risk it, like using the bus lane, which I've even seen happen in front of police vans at the top of Tadcaster Road. What's the saying - the law is for the other fools!
Still a fraction of what they could catch, you could get that no. in one day on Moor Lane, Woodthorpe, and sit at Askham Bar roundabout and you'll get double that on the phone. The odds of getting caught are so slim, people will risk it, like using the bus lane, which I've even seen happen in front of police vans at the top of Tadcaster Road. What's the saying - the law is for the other fools! King Edward
  • Score: 0

7:48am Fri 28 May 10

mystic_genius says...

UsernameNotAvailable wrote:
How about a review of the speed limits - which were knee-jerk reaction numbers plucked out of thin air by politicians 45 years ago, back when cars had hopeless brakes and the driving test was easy? Speed over a set limit DOES NOT kill, only innapropriate speed and dangerous/careless driving. It's a shame that most people are too stupid to judge what's appropriate and so need black-and-white limits. Some of the 50mph limit straight dual carriagways I've seen are ridiculous. Too much obsession with speed limits. For the Government it is ALL about money, not safety. I can't believe some morons still fall for the anti-'speeder' propoganda. I have much more concern for the erratic, inconsiderate and downright bloody dangerous driving I see every day by vehicles driving within the speed limit. Also the person who mentioned small numberplates on motorcycles pointing to the rider wanting to avoid their reg being seen - rubbish I'm afraid. Most small plates are installed for vanity. Police officers have actually admitted that some smaller than regulation plates (not stupid small though) can be read fine, but the law is black and white, and besides, it's easy money.
Oh yee-ha, someone who talks a modicum of common sense at last.
`
From what I recall, the speed limits were set based on the stopping distances of a 1973 Ford something or other, the best selling car at the time.
`
Hands up those people who drive a 1973 Ford something? No one. So why these outdated laws are not updated is beyond me. Actually, it's not. It's the safety morons who believe that the human race is immortal, and there can be a scenario where no one dies.
`
All I'll say is this: the Germans are more than capable of operating on a road with no limits, using the exact same vehicles made in the exact same factories that we drive. Why?
[quote][p][bold]UsernameNotAvailable[/bold] wrote: How about a review of the speed limits - which were knee-jerk reaction numbers plucked out of thin air by politicians 45 years ago, back when cars had hopeless brakes and the driving test was easy? Speed over a set limit DOES NOT kill, only innapropriate speed and dangerous/careless driving. It's a shame that most people are too stupid to judge what's appropriate and so need black-and-white limits. Some of the 50mph limit straight dual carriagways I've seen are ridiculous. Too much obsession with speed limits. For the Government it is ALL about money, not safety. I can't believe some morons still fall for the anti-'speeder' propoganda. I have much more concern for the erratic, inconsiderate and downright bloody dangerous driving I see every day by vehicles driving within the speed limit. Also the person who mentioned small numberplates on motorcycles pointing to the rider wanting to avoid their reg being seen - rubbish I'm afraid. Most small plates are installed for vanity. Police officers have actually admitted that some smaller than regulation plates (not stupid small though) can be read fine, but the law is black and white, and besides, it's easy money.[/p][/quote]Oh yee-ha, someone who talks a modicum of common sense at last. ` From what I recall, the speed limits were set based on the stopping distances of a 1973 Ford something or other, the best selling car at the time. ` Hands up those people who drive a 1973 Ford something? No one. So why these outdated laws are not updated is beyond me. Actually, it's not. It's the safety morons who believe that the human race is immortal, and there can be a scenario where no one dies. ` All I'll say is this: the Germans are more than capable of operating on a road with no limits, using the exact same vehicles made in the exact same factories that we drive. Why? mystic_genius
  • Score: 0

8:50am Fri 28 May 10

Victor Smythe says...

King Edward wrote:
Still a fraction of what they could catch, you could get that no. in one day on Moor Lane, Woodthorpe, and sit at Askham Bar roundabout and you'll get double that on the phone. The odds of getting caught are so slim, people will risk it, like using the bus lane, which I've even seen happen in front of police vans at the top of Tadcaster Road. What's the saying - the law is for the other fools!
Funny you should mention that road. Plod does sit there with his Gatzo from time to time. But consider the facts:

1. Rarely are there any accidents on that stretch of road and certainly not serious ones

2.The police themselves speed down there -I've seen a panda car not attending an emergency set off the 'your exceeding 30mph' sign

...just generating money - no benefit and hypocrytical too.
[quote][p][bold]King Edward[/bold] wrote: Still a fraction of what they could catch, you could get that no. in one day on Moor Lane, Woodthorpe, and sit at Askham Bar roundabout and you'll get double that on the phone. The odds of getting caught are so slim, people will risk it, like using the bus lane, which I've even seen happen in front of police vans at the top of Tadcaster Road. What's the saying - the law is for the other fools![/p][/quote]Funny you should mention that road. Plod does sit there with his Gatzo from time to time. But consider the facts: 1. Rarely are there any accidents on that stretch of road and certainly not serious ones 2.The police themselves speed down there -I've seen a panda car not attending an emergency set off the 'your exceeding 30mph' sign ...just generating money - no benefit and hypocrytical too. Victor Smythe
  • Score: 0

9:31pm Fri 28 May 10

dodgydave says...

Far too many people roll over and allow the system to put points on their licence without putting up a fight! The system is set up to make it easy for the police to bully you into taking your 3 points and allowing the weight of the law to fall on your shoulders without questioning their evidence! There have been many studies into the accuracy of the LT20:20 Speed gun, as used by our local bobbies, a recent case had a brick wall moving at 17 miles per hour! That is how inaccurate they are! I worked out the other day, that I fought over 18points in the last 4 years and have won every case! ...I can hear the voices crying 'got away with it you mean' No, I don't mean that, it is for the Police to prove you guilty in a court of law beyond any reasonable doubt! Not for you to lie down, take your points and sulk!
I have a perfectly clean licence and intend to keep it that way, I do NOT intend to line the pockets of the Police and Government with my hard earned money via stealth taxes!
PLEASE do not take any thing a Police officer says to you at the roadside as the gospel truth, they have targets to meet...as this story shows! You have the right to remain silent, use it. Give your name and address, as per the law and nothing else! Don't admit to any offence until you have sought good legal advice from a specialist in the field.... Finally, for your interest, do you want to know how much it has cost me to fight each one? Nothing! Why? Because if you are innocent, you will have your legal fees paid!
I hope this helps one or two of you!
Far too many people roll over and allow the system to put points on their licence without putting up a fight! The system is set up to make it easy for the police to bully you into taking your 3 points and allowing the weight of the law to fall on your shoulders without questioning their evidence! There have been many studies into the accuracy of the LT20:20 Speed gun, as used by our local bobbies, a recent case had a brick wall moving at 17 miles per hour! That is how inaccurate they are! I worked out the other day, that I fought over 18points in the last 4 years and have won every case! ...I can hear the voices crying 'got away with it you mean' No, I don't mean that, it is for the Police to prove you guilty in a court of law beyond any reasonable doubt! Not for you to lie down, take your points and sulk! I have a perfectly clean licence and intend to keep it that way, I do NOT intend to line the pockets of the Police and Government with my hard earned money via stealth taxes! PLEASE do not take any thing a Police officer says to you at the roadside as the gospel truth, they have targets to meet...as this story shows! You have the right to remain silent, use it. Give your name and address, as per the law and nothing else! Don't admit to any offence until you have sought good legal advice from a specialist in the field.... Finally, for your interest, do you want to know how much it has cost me to fight each one? Nothing! Why? Because if you are innocent, you will have your legal fees paid! I hope this helps one or two of you! dodgydave
  • Score: 0

8:29am Sat 29 May 10

Mr Udigawa says...

dodgydave wrote:
Far too many people roll over and allow the system to put points on their licence without putting up a fight! The system is set up to make it easy for the police to bully you into taking your 3 points and allowing the weight of the law to fall on your shoulders without questioning their evidence! There have been many studies into the accuracy of the LT20:20 Speed gun, as used by our local bobbies, a recent case had a brick wall moving at 17 miles per hour! That is how inaccurate they are! I worked out the other day, that I fought over 18points in the last 4 years and have won every case! ...I can hear the voices crying 'got away with it you mean' No, I don't mean that, it is for the Police to prove you guilty in a court of law beyond any reasonable doubt! Not for you to lie down, take your points and sulk! I have a perfectly clean licence and intend to keep it that way, I do NOT intend to line the pockets of the Police and Government with my hard earned money via stealth taxes! PLEASE do not take any thing a Police officer says to you at the roadside as the gospel truth, they have targets to meet...as this story shows! You have the right to remain silent, use it. Give your name and address, as per the law and nothing else! Don't admit to any offence until you have sought good legal advice from a specialist in the field.... Finally, for your interest, do you want to know how much it has cost me to fight each one? Nothing! Why? Because if you are innocent, you will have your legal fees paid! I hope this helps one or two of you!
Cheers Dave, I believe I am a considerate & careful driver, however the one time I was caught speeding was 8 years ago when England were playing Argentina during the later stages of the World cup. I was travelling at about 60 in a 50 mph section of roadworks on the M42. It was a Saturday afternoon, the road was empty, it was a fine sunny day, the roadworks weren't in progress, all there was was a line of cones either side of 3 carriageways. My own stupid fault I know but it did seem overkill.
[quote][p][bold]dodgydave[/bold] wrote: Far too many people roll over and allow the system to put points on their licence without putting up a fight! The system is set up to make it easy for the police to bully you into taking your 3 points and allowing the weight of the law to fall on your shoulders without questioning their evidence! There have been many studies into the accuracy of the LT20:20 Speed gun, as used by our local bobbies, a recent case had a brick wall moving at 17 miles per hour! That is how inaccurate they are! I worked out the other day, that I fought over 18points in the last 4 years and have won every case! ...I can hear the voices crying 'got away with it you mean' No, I don't mean that, it is for the Police to prove you guilty in a court of law beyond any reasonable doubt! Not for you to lie down, take your points and sulk! I have a perfectly clean licence and intend to keep it that way, I do NOT intend to line the pockets of the Police and Government with my hard earned money via stealth taxes! PLEASE do not take any thing a Police officer says to you at the roadside as the gospel truth, they have targets to meet...as this story shows! You have the right to remain silent, use it. Give your name and address, as per the law and nothing else! Don't admit to any offence until you have sought good legal advice from a specialist in the field.... Finally, for your interest, do you want to know how much it has cost me to fight each one? Nothing! Why? Because if you are innocent, you will have your legal fees paid! I hope this helps one or two of you![/p][/quote]Cheers Dave, I believe I am a considerate & careful driver, however the one time I was caught speeding was 8 years ago when England were playing Argentina during the later stages of the World cup. I was travelling at about 60 in a 50 mph section of roadworks on the M42. It was a Saturday afternoon, the road was empty, it was a fine sunny day, the roadworks weren't in progress, all there was was a line of cones either side of 3 carriageways. My own stupid fault I know but it did seem overkill. Mr Udigawa
  • Score: 0

6:32pm Mon 31 May 10

viking8 says...

Makes me laugh when people moan that poor old car drivers are being fined for profit. If you cannot pay the fine, dont do the crime! I have been driving 25 years and never had a fine or any points. The only accidents I have ever had have been idiots piling in the back, pulling across me. Speed limit shoud be dropped to 20 mph from the outer ring road to town and every road inbetween.
Makes me laugh when people moan that poor old car drivers are being fined for profit. If you cannot pay the fine, dont do the crime! I have been driving 25 years and never had a fine or any points. The only accidents I have ever had have been idiots piling in the back, pulling across me. Speed limit shoud be dropped to 20 mph from the outer ring road to town and every road inbetween. viking8
  • Score: 0

7:56pm Mon 31 May 10

Martha Mellow says...

TooRelaxed wrote:
pedalling paul wrote:
TooRelaxed wrote:
Blah blah beleagured motorist blah blah road tax blah blah evil cyclists blah blah etc
Fine until one of your own relatives is laid in a hospital bed or on a mortuary slab, as a result of someone driving at inappropriate or illegal speed. Then you might change your tune.
Boy Paul, you really must be the pillock they say you are.
Irony, spoof, satire, skit, mockery, taking the p, call it what you want that's what it was, and it's not the first time you've missed it by a mile.
.
Perhaps if you took your head out of your bum and stopped knee-jerking your platitudes at everyone you'd have less difficulty understanding the real world?
Change your name back to TooRaged or whatever it was, keep taking the pills and calm down!
Meanwhile - this all seems a fuss about nowt - stick to the speed limits and worry not a jot about fines. Simples! ;-)
[quote][p][bold]TooRelaxed[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]pedalling paul [/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]TooRelaxed[/bold] wrote: Blah blah beleagured motorist blah blah road tax blah blah evil cyclists blah blah etc[/p][/quote]Fine until one of your own relatives is laid in a hospital bed or on a mortuary slab, as a result of someone driving at inappropriate or illegal speed. Then you might change your tune.[/p][/quote]Boy Paul, you really must be the pillock they say you are. Irony, spoof, satire, skit, mockery, taking the p, call it what you want that's what it was, and it's not the first time you've missed it by a mile. . Perhaps if you took your head out of your bum and stopped knee-jerking your platitudes at everyone you'd have less difficulty understanding the real world?[/p][/quote]Change your name back to TooRaged or whatever it was, keep taking the pills and calm down! Meanwhile - this all seems a fuss about nowt - stick to the speed limits and worry not a jot about fines. Simples! ;-) Martha Mellow
  • Score: 0

7:58pm Mon 31 May 10

A19A64 says...

Perhaps the York or North Yorks officers who skulk in Naburn Court attempting to `gun`vehicles on Naburn Lane as they travel at a breakneck 36mph down the flyover can explain how it is a better contribution to road safety than other trafpol duties?
Perhaps the York or North Yorks officers who skulk in Naburn Court attempting to `gun`vehicles on Naburn Lane as they travel at a breakneck 36mph down the flyover can explain how it is a better contribution to road safety than other trafpol duties? A19A64
  • Score: 0

8:37pm Mon 31 May 10

Martha Mellow says...

I'd repeat, Mr/Ms Cawood - don't speed, don't break the law, don't worry! Can't see what the fuss is about. I used to speed in my youth, then one day a child ran out in front of me - I just did stop. Just. Since then I realised I was being a prat, speed kills - just slow down. Take it easy - everyone is a winner then.
I'd repeat, Mr/Ms Cawood - don't speed, don't break the law, don't worry! Can't see what the fuss is about. I used to speed in my youth, then one day a child ran out in front of me - I just did stop. Just. Since then I realised I was being a prat, speed kills - just slow down. Take it easy - everyone is a winner then. Martha Mellow
  • Score: 0

10:40pm Mon 31 May 10

KittyMcGlitty says...

Whilst I agree that speeding is breaking the law, the laws now need to be reviewed in terms of the modern car.... yes slow on residential roads, near schools ofcourse, but on motorways and A64 should we be penalised for driving at 70-80mph in optimum drivingconditions ie clear, dry road? Just another fundraiser for the Xmas party... much like NYCC and their parking tickets!
Whilst I agree that speeding is breaking the law, the laws now need to be reviewed in terms of the modern car.... yes slow on residential roads, near schools ofcourse, but on motorways and A64 should we be penalised for driving at 70-80mph in optimum drivingconditions ie clear, dry road? Just another fundraiser for the Xmas party... much like NYCC and their parking tickets! KittyMcGlitty
  • Score: 0

9:36am Tue 1 Jun 10

Martha Mellow says...

There is 10% leeway is there not for speed traps and if you are doing over 77mph in a 70 zone and get stopped then tough! Whose fault it that?
All of us don't agree with some laws, but if we could just pick and choose the ones we like; well that just isn't workable is it? And hey - you save money by keeping below 70mph in terms of miles per gallon! :-)
There is 10% leeway is there not for speed traps and if you are doing over 77mph in a 70 zone and get stopped then tough! Whose fault it that? All of us don't agree with some laws, but if we could just pick and choose the ones we like; well that just isn't workable is it? And hey - you save money by keeping below 70mph in terms of miles per gallon! :-) Martha Mellow
  • Score: 0

9:37pm Tue 1 Jun 10

Sawday2 says...

Such a seemingly large number of motorists being 'caught' is not a success, it's failure. A failure of poor signage, constantly changing speed limits, inconsistant application of speed limits and some highly dubious possibly illegal speed limits.

How often do you see a speed camera sign but no accompanying indication of the limit. Or what about, for example, on the A59 at Moor Monkton - 40mph indicated on the approach but no sign to indicate the end of this limit. If one doesn't know whey the speed limit changes from 40 back to 60 then how is one to know what the speed limit is at a particular point.
Such a seemingly large number of motorists being 'caught' is not a success, it's failure. A failure of poor signage, constantly changing speed limits, inconsistant application of speed limits and some highly dubious possibly illegal speed limits. How often do you see a speed camera sign but no accompanying indication of the limit. Or what about, for example, on the A59 at Moor Monkton - 40mph indicated on the approach but no sign to indicate the end of this limit. If one doesn't know whey the speed limit changes from 40 back to 60 then how is one to know what the speed limit is at a particular point. Sawday2
  • Score: 0

8:21am Wed 2 Jun 10

dodgydave says...

Martha Mellow wrote:
There is 10% leeway is there not for speed traps and if you are doing over 77mph in a 70 zone and get stopped then tough! Whose fault it that?
All of us don't agree with some laws, but if we could just pick and choose the ones we like; well that just isn't workable is it? And hey - you save money by keeping below 70mph in terms of miles per gallon! :-)
Martha, with all due respect, your statement only goes to prove the ignorance that most motorists are lead to believe, only to fall fowl of the law..Speed limit is an ABSOLUTE, there is no 'leeway' ...I once received a NIP from a fixed camera for doing 31.7mph in a 30!!! These devices as well as the Police's speed guns have been proved time and time again to be faulty! In court of law, the evidence MUST be proven to be accurate, not almost accurate. The whole system is set up to make it more favourable for you to not argue with the officer at the roadside, take your points and go home with your tail between your legs! ...When an office says 'Do you know why I stopped you?' He isn't asking that to start a conversation, he is asking that because when you say 'Yeah, I was speeding' He already has an admission of guilt! ..they are clever these bobbies! Speed cameras are prone to flaws, as much as the humans opperating them. I am not advocating speeding, merely saying do not just roll over and let them do the nasty to you! There is a perfect example of why you should fight it in a sister newspaper, please see the link below

http://www.bucksfree
press.co.uk/news/816
5201.Speeding_charge
_dropped_due_to__fau
lty__camera/
[quote][p][bold]Martha Mellow[/bold] wrote: There is 10% leeway is there not for speed traps and if you are doing over 77mph in a 70 zone and get stopped then tough! Whose fault it that? All of us don't agree with some laws, but if we could just pick and choose the ones we like; well that just isn't workable is it? And hey - you save money by keeping below 70mph in terms of miles per gallon! :-)[/p][/quote]Martha, with all due respect, your statement only goes to prove the ignorance that most motorists are lead to believe, only to fall fowl of the law..Speed limit is an ABSOLUTE, there is no 'leeway' ...I once received a NIP from a fixed camera for doing 31.7mph in a 30!!! These devices as well as the Police's speed guns have been proved time and time again to be faulty! In court of law, the evidence MUST be proven to be accurate, not almost accurate. The whole system is set up to make it more favourable for you to not argue with the officer at the roadside, take your points and go home with your tail between your legs! ...When an office says 'Do you know why I stopped you?' He isn't asking that to start a conversation, he is asking that because when you say 'Yeah, I was speeding' He already has an admission of guilt! ..they are clever these bobbies! Speed cameras are prone to flaws, as much as the humans opperating them. I am not advocating speeding, merely saying do not just roll over and let them do the nasty to you! There is a perfect example of why you should fight it in a sister newspaper, please see the link below http://www.bucksfree press.co.uk/news/816 5201.Speeding_charge _dropped_due_to__fau lty__camera/ dodgydave
  • Score: 0

5:04pm Wed 2 Jun 10

Martha Mellow says...

With respect, Dave - don't need to fight it, join campaigns or sign petitions - I just stick to the bloody speed limits!
Like I said before, I'm with Rouseau - laws free us, there will be some you don't like - but tough! Don't agree? Well perhaps if I used the freedom you'd like to grant me from the law to nick your new flat screen TV, you might think again!

Rousseau.
With respect, Dave - don't need to fight it, join campaigns or sign petitions - I just stick to the bloody speed limits! Like I said before, I'm with Rouseau - laws free us, there will be some you don't like - but tough! Don't agree? Well perhaps if I used the freedom you'd like to grant me from the law to nick your new flat screen TV, you might think again! Rousseau. Martha Mellow
  • Score: 0

Comments are closed on this article.

Send us your news, pictures and videos

Most read stories

Local Info

Enter your postcode, town or place name

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree